UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460

OFFICE OF

PREVENTION, PESTICIDES

AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES

PC Code No.: 129098

DP Barcode: D300893, D338293, 

D338294 and D339162

Date: May 16, 2007

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT: EFED IR-4 Registration for the Fungicide Fluazinam (OMEGA 500F) for use 

on Legume Vegetable Subgroup 6A, Bushberry Subgroup 13B, Brassica 

Leafy Vegetable Crop Group 5, Ginseng, Dry Bean, Lima Bean and Succulent 

Bean Crop Subgroup 6B to Control Various blights and Molds.

TO: Dan Rosenblatt, Risk Manager 05

Tony Kish, Risk Manager 22

Janet Whitehurst, Risk Manager Reviewer

Registration Division (PY S-7913 and PY S-7318)

FROM: ERB V Team for Fluazinam:

N.E. Federoff, Wildlife Biologist

José L. Meléndez, Chemist

Environmental Fate and Effects Division (7507P)

THROUGH: Mah T. Shamim, Ph.D., Chief

Environmental Risk Branch V

Environmental Fate and Effects Division (7507P)

The EFED Screening Level Environmental Risk Assessment for Fluazinam is attached. An 

overview of our findings can be found in the Executive Summary. 

Data Gaps and Uncertainties in the Exposure Assessment: 

Environmental Fate:

161-2 and 161-3: Additional data has been requested to upgrade the Aqueous Photolysis and 

Photodegradation on Soil data requirements. The additional information will refine quantitation 

of the parent and degradates.

164-1: EFED believes that the available Terrestrial Field Dissipation studies provide useful 
2

information about the parent fluazinam. However, poor recoveries for two of the transformation 

products upon storage stability cast doubts over the results obtained for them in the field. At this 

time, only one new study is required. The study should be conducted on a typical site. The 

registrant must take all measurements of precaution to assure that the results are reliable. A 

concurrent storage stability study must be conducted and submitted to the Agency.

Ecological Effects:

Some of the submitted plant studies were deemed invalid and should be repeated. The following 

plant studies are needed:

123-1: Tier II - Terrestrial Plant Growth - Vegetative vigor. 

123-2: Tier II - Aquatic Plant Growth - duckweed (Lemna gibba), freshwater green algae 

(Selenastrum capricornutum), marine diatom (Skeletonema costatum) and a freshwater diatom.

Environmental Hazard Statements

Manufacturing Use: 

This pesticide is toxic to fish and aquatic invertebrates. Do not apply directly to water, or to areas 

where surface water is present, or to intertidal areas below the mean high water mark. Do not 

contaminate water when disposing of equipment washwaters or rinsate. Do not apply when 

weather conditions favor drift from treated areas. Runoff and drift from treated areas may be 

hazardous to aquatic organisms in neighboring areas. Do not allow this product to drift.

End Use Products:

This pesticide is toxic to fish and aquatic invertebrates. Do not apply directly to water, or to areas 

where surface water is present, or to intertidal areas below the mean high water mark. Do not 

contaminate water when disposing of equipment washwaters or rinsate. Do not apply when 

weather conditions favor drift from treated areas. Runoff and drift from treated areas may be 

hazardous to aquatic organisms in neighboring areas. Do not allow this product to drift.

Label statements for spray drift management:

AVOIDING SPRAY DRIFT AT THE APPLICATION SITE IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF 

THE APPLICATOR. The interaction of many equipment-and-weather-related factors determine 

the potential for spray drift. The applicator is responsible for considering all these factors when 

making decisions. Where states have more stringent regulations, they should be observed.
3

Table of Contents

I. Executive Summary......................................................................................4

II. Problem Formulation...................................................................................5

III. Analysis..................................................................................................14

IV. Risk Characterization..................................................................................25

V. Appendices................................................................................................35
4

 

 

 

 

 

 

Environmental Fate and Ecological Risk Assessment

for the Proposed New IR-4 Uses of Fluazinam 

Legume Vegetable Subgroup 6A, Bushberry Subgroup 13B, Brassica Leafy Vegetable Crop Group 

5, Ginseng, Dry Bean, Lima Bean and Succulent Bean Crop Subgroup 6B

Prepared by:

N.E. Federoff, Wildlife Biologist

José L. Meléndez, Chemist 

U. S. Environmental Protection Agency

Office of Pesticide Programs

Environmental Fate and Effects Division

Environmental Risk Branch V

Ariel Rios Building (Mail Code 7507P) 

1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW

Washington, DC 20460

Reviewed by:

Mah Shamim, Branch Chief ERB5
5

I. Executive Summary

Available data suggest that fluazinam and its transformation products are moderately persistent, 

should not leach substantially to ground water but may present concerns for transport to surface 

water by spray drift or runoff (especially in soils with low organic content). Fluazinam is 

practically nontoxic to birds on an acute dietary exposure basis. The concentrations at which acute 

effects may be observed for birds is unknown, but is greater than 10,500 ppm. Thus no acute avian 

RQs could be calculated. However, chronic LOCs were exceeded for endangered and 

non-endangered avian (RQs ranged from 3.40 to 0.06) and mammalian (RQs ranged from 6.80 to 

0.12) species. Acute and chronic risk was indicated for endangered and non-endangered 

freshwater fish, estuarine/marine invertebrates and benthic organisms. In addition, acute risk was 

indicated for endangered estuarine fish and freshwater invertebrates. Currently, EFED does not 

assess risk to insects. Results of acceptable studies are used for recommending appropriate label 

precautions. Since fluazinam is practically nontoxic to honey bees, low risk is assumed and no 

labeling precautions are required. Risks to plants, calculated from valid submitted data, were 

below LOCs.

II. Problem Formulation

A. Stressor Source and Distribution 

1. Sources and Intensity 

Fluazinam, CAS Name: 3-chloro-N-[3-chloro-2,6-dinitro-4-(trifluoromethyl)phenyl]-5-

(trifluoromethyl)-2-pyridinamine, and IUPAC Name: 3-chloro-N-(3-chloro-5-trifluoromethyl-2-

pyridyl)-α,α,α-trifluoro-2,6-dinitro-p-toluidine, has a CAS Number of 79622-59-61 and a PC Code 

of 129098. It is a pyridine (dinitroaniline) fungicide. The structure consists of one phenyl ring 

with two nitro groups, and a pyridine ring. Both rings have a trifluoromethyl group. The rings are 

attached by a nitrogen (amine). The product name is Omega 500F Agricultural Fungicide (EPA 

Reg. No. 71512-1). It contains 40.0% fluazinam. The application methods vary with the crops. 

For example, aerial applications are prohibited, but the material may be applied by sprinkler 

irrigation, or, for brassica leafy vegetables, it may be applied by soil incorporation prior to 

transplanting. The chemical is expected to reach the foliage and the soil. During rain events, it 

could runoff to adjacent bodies of water. It could reach bodies of water also via spray drift.

2. Physicochemical, Fate, and Transport Properties

Based on the properties of the chemical, applications of fluazinam are likely to reach the target (the 

crop), but off site drift is also possible. The chemical has a relatively low solubility (71 ug/L at pH 

7), a low vapor pressure (8.25x10-6 mm Hg), and a moderate Henry’s Law constant (6.73 x 10-7

atm-m

3

/mol). Due to the fact that it appears to show short half-lives in aquatic media, and it binds 

to soils and organic matter, EFED believes that the chemical would not volatilize substantially

from soil surfaces or from the water.
6

EFED concludes that fluazinam appears to degrade at moderate to low rates in aerobic soils

(observed DT50~30 days), but it is more rapidly transformed into other compounds of similar 

backbone structure in high pH environments (hydrolysis half-life at pH 9=6 days) or in aquatic 

media, both, aerobic (half life=4.0-7.4 hours) or anaerobic (half-life=6.4 hours). Fluazinam may

be photolyzed relatively rapidly (2.5 days) to form a tricyclic compound (G-504). The total 

fluazinam residues (fluazinam and its transformation products) are persistent in most 

environments (aerobic aquatic metabolism 51-71 days, and relatively stable in anaerobic aquatic 

environment) and are likely to reach aquatic media through runoff. Since fluazinam does not alter 

substantially its backbone structure in the environment, but instead, goes through a slight 

transformation of functional groups, EFED considered parent and transformation products 

together when making assessments.

While the parent (mean KOC=1958) and two transformation products, HYPA (mean KOC=920) and 

CAPA (mean KOC=2067), have relatively low mobility, indicating a relatively low potential for 

ground water contamination, further information on the other transformation products is 

unavailable and should be required in a new terrestrial field dissipation study.

Fluazinam shows a potential to bioaccumulate in fish (BCF=1220X for whole fish; ≥67% of 

residues depurated in 21 days).

3. Pesticide Type, Class, and Mode of Action

Fluazinam is a new protectant and contact fungicide, a phenyl pyridinamine. It is an uncoupler of 

oxidative phosphorilation in the respiration chain involving protonation/deprotonation (it inhibits 

fungal respiration, and the production of energy within the fungus). Fluazinam belongs to a 

chemical group classified as a multi-site fungicide (chemicals which act as general toxophores 

with several sites of action).

4. Overview of Pesticide Usage

This assessment is intended to address the proposed new uses of fluazinam. The chemical is also 

currently registered for use on two agricultural crops (peanuts and potatoes). Typical applications 

are made at 7 to 14-day intervals per season, depending on the pest to be treated and the crop. For 

additional details, refer to the Use Characterization section of this document.

B. Receptors

 

1. Ecological Effects 

Ecological measures of effect for fluazinam are based on registrant-submitted toxicity studies

Acute and chronic endpoints are selected from available test data, as the data set allows. A 

complete discussion of all toxicity data available for this risk assessment and the resulting 

measures of ecological effects selected for each taxonomic group are included in the Appendix of 
7

this document. 

2. Ecosystems at Risk 

Aquatic ecosystems potentially at risk include water bodies adjacent to, or downstream of, the 

treated field and might include ponds, lakes, and reservoirs, or flowing waterways such as streams 

or rivers. Since fluazinam has the potential to be used in coastal areas, marine ecosystems 

(including estuaries) are also potentially at risk. Risks will be assessed for aquatic animals (fish, 

invertebrates, amphibians) and plants, which are assumed to occur in small, static ponds that 

receive runoff and drift from adjacent treated areas. 

Terrestrial ecosystems potentially at risk include the treated area and areas immediately adjacent to 

the treated area that might receive drift or runoff, and might include other cultivated fields, fence 

rows and hedgerows, meadows, fallow fields or grasslands, woodlands, riparian habitats and other 

uncultivated areas. 

C. Assessment Endpoints 

Assessment endpoints are explicit expressions of the actual environmental value that is to be 

protected. Assessment endpoint selection is based on valued entities or ecological receptors, the 

ecosystems potentially at risk, pesticide migration pathways, and routes by which ecological 

receptors may be exposed to the stressor. A summary of the assessment endpoints and measures 

of ecological effect selected to characterize potential ecological risks associated with exposure is 

provided in the following Table. Specifically, this assessment addresses birds, mammals, reptiles, 

amphibians, invertebrates, plants, and fish. Birds are used as surrogates for reptiles and 

terrestrial-phase amphibians, and fish are used as surrogates for aquatic-phase amphibians. 

Although all endpoints are measured at the individual level, they provide insight about risks at 

higher levels of biological organization (e.g. populations and communities). For example, 

pesticide effects on individual survivorship have important implications for both population rates 

and habitat carrying capacity. 

Summary of Possible Ecological Risk Assessment Endpoints 

Assessment Endpoint Effects Measurement Endpoint

1. Survival, reproduction, and growth of 

individuals and populations of birds

1a. Oral LD50 (Japanese quail; mallard duck)

1b. Dietary LC50 (mallard duck; bobwhite, Japanese quail)

1c. Reproductive NOAEC, LOAEC (bobwhite quail, mallard duck)

2. Survival, reproduction, and growth of 

individuals and populations of mammals

2a. Oral LD50 (rat)

2b. Dietary LC50 (rat)

2c. Reproductive NOAEC, LOAEC (rat)
8

Summary of Possible Ecological Risk Assessment Endpoints 

Assessment Endpoint Effects Measurement Endpoint

3. Survival and reproduction of individuals 

and communities of freshwater fish and 

invertebrates

3a. LC50 (rainbow trout; bluegill sunfish; fathead minnow)

3b. Reproductive NOAEC, LOAEC (fathead minnow)

3c. LC50 (Daphnia magna, Daphnia pulex, cyclopoid and calanoid copepods,

Asellus aquaticus, Cloeon dipterum, Gammarus pulex, Notonecta glauca, 

Chironomus riparius, Chaoborus crystallinus, Chironomus riparius)

3d. Reproductive NOAEC, LOAEC (Daphnia magna)

4. Survival and reproduction of individuals 

and communities of estuarine/marine fish and 

invertebrates 

4a. LC50 (sheepshead minnow)

4b. LC50 (Eastern oyster, mysid shrimp)

5. Maintenance and growth of individuals and 

populations of aquatic plants from standing 

crop or biomass

5a. NOAEC, EC25 (Selenastrum capricornutum)

6. Perpetuation of individuals and populations 

of non-target terrestrial plants (crops and 

non-crop plant species)

6a. Vegetative vigor (11 species)

6b. Seedling emergence (11 species)

7. Survival of terrestrial invertebrate 

populations

7a. Contact/oral LD50 (honeybee)

This ecological risk assessment considers maximum application rates to fields that have vulnerable 

soils, maximum number of applications (as well as single applications), and minimum intervals for 

uses on representative crops to estimate exposure concentrations. This assessment is not intended 

to represent a site or time-specific analysis; it is intended to represent high-end exposures at a 

national level. The most sensitive toxicity measures of effect are used from surrogate test species 

to estimate treatment-related direct effects on acute mortality and chronic reproductive, growth, 

and survival assessment endpoints. 

D. Conceptual Model

1. Risk Hypotheses

Risk hypotheses are specific assumptions about potential adverse effects (i.e., changes in 

assessment endpoints) and may be based on theory and logic, empirical data, mathematical models, 

or probability models (EPA 1998a). For this assessment, the risk is stressor-initiated, where the 

stressor is the release of fluazinam into the environment. The following risk hypothesis is 

presumed for this screening-level assessment:

The use of Fluazinam will likely involve situations where terrestrial and aquatic animals and 

plants will be exposed to the chemical and/or its transformation products. Based on information 

on environmental fate, mode of action, direct toxicity and potential indirect effects, EFED assumes 

potential to cause reduced survival, growth, and reproduction to terrestrial and/or aquatic 

animals and plants as a result of the proposed use of the pesticide. 
9

The conceptual model is a generic graphic depiction of the risk hypothesis. It includes the potential 

pesticide or stressor (fluazinam), the source of the pesticide and/or transport pathways, exposure 

media, exposure point, biological receptor types, and attribute changes.

2. Diagram

Based on an examination of the physical/chemical properties of fluazinam, the fate and disposition 

in the environment, and mode of application, a conceptual model was developed that represents the 

possible relationships between the stressors, ecological receptors, and the assessment endpoints. 

In order for a chemical to pose an ecological risk, it must reach ecological receptors in biologically

significant concentrations. An exposure pathway is the means by which a pesticide moves in the 

environment from a source to an ecological receptor. For an ecological exposure pathway to be 

complete, it must have a source, a release mechanism, an environmental transport medium, a point 

of exposure for ecological receptors, and a feasible route of exposure. In addition, the potential 

mechanisms of degradation/transformation (i.e., which degradation/transformation products may

form in the environment, in which media, and how much) must be understood, especially for a 

chemical whose metabolites/transformation products are of greater toxicological concern than the 

parent compound. The assessment of ecological exposure pathways, therefore, includes an 

examination of the source and potential migration pathways for constituents, and the determination 

of potential exposure routes.

Under the proposed use of fluazinam, the sources and mechanisms of release of the compound are 

from broadcast spray applications (fluazinam is applied by sprinkler irrigation or by soil 

incorporation). Surface runoff from the areas of application is assumed to depend on factors such 

as topography, irrigation, and rainfall events. Direct deposition may result in contamination of 

food items that may be consumed by terrestrial organisms. Spray drift results in contaminated 

adjacent areas, such as bodies of water.

The major point of exposure for aquatic organisms is direct contact with contaminated water (gill/ 

integument uptake), while for terrestrial animals it is consumption of food contaminated with 

residues. For plants, the point of exposure is root uptake.

The representative aquatic receptors are certain freshwater and estuarine/ marine fish, invertebrates, 

and, in certain cases, aquatic plants. The representative terrestrial receptors are mammals, birds, 

and, in certain cases, terrestrial plants. It should be noted, that these species do not cover all the 

possible species in the animal and plant kingdoms; certain taxa are considered as surrogates for 

other taxa. For example, fish are considered surrogates for amphibians.

The attribute changes depend on the type of test (e.g., reduced survival, growth, or reproduction for 

animals and seedling emergence and vegetative vigor for plants).
10

E. Analysis Plan 

This document characterizes the environmental fate and effects of fluazinam to assess whether the 

proposed label use of this compound results in potential risk to non-target organisms at levels 

above the Agency’s LOCs. The Agency may be concerned with potential risk to non-target aquatic 

organisms based on very high toxicity to fish and aquatic invertebrates. The methods by which the 

Agency will evaluate potential exposures, effects, and risks to non-target organisms are described 

below. Available environmental fate, ecotoxicity, and physicochemical property data were taken 

from previous assessments conducted by EFED. These data were not re-evaluated for this 

assessment.

1. Preliminary Identification of Data Gaps 

At this time, the persistence of fluazinam transformation products is uncertain because the 

information about these compounds from terrestrial field dissipation studies has been deemed 

invalid. The aquatic metabolism studies suggest high persistence of such degradates. A new 

terrestrial field dissipation study has been required. In addition, the extent and importance of 

photolysis (both in water and on soil) is not very clear because the supplemental data available is 

not quantitative. EFED requested additional data from such studies to clarify this point.
11

The database for ecotoxicity is mostly complete, however, some of the submitted plant studies 

were deemed invalid and should be repeated. The following studies need to be submitted:

123-1: Tier II - Terrestrial Plant Growth - Vegetative vigor. 

123-2: Tier II - Aquatic Plant Growth - duckweed (Lemna gibba), freshwater green algae 

(Selenastrum capricornutum), marine diatom (Skeletonema costatum) and a freshwater diatom.

2. Measures to Evaluate Risk Hypotheses and Conceptual Model 

a. Measures of Exposure 

Exposure to aquatic organisms is assumed to occur through direct contact with contaminated water. 

Aquatic exposures can be estimated from monitoring data or by simulation modeling. In the 

absence of suitable monitoring data, the EFED chose to measure exposure by the use of a 

simulation model for fluazinam. Generally, aquatic exposure estimates are generated from EFED 

models and incorporate maximum proposed use rates and empirically-derived fate properties. For 

agricultural uses, exposure concentrations for aquatic ecosystems assessments were estimated 

based on EFED’s Tier 2 aquatic model PRZM/EXAMS. A graphical user interface (pe4v01.pl), 

developed by the USEPA <http://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/water/>, was used to facilitate 

inputting chemical and use specific parameters into the appropriate PRZM input files (inp) and 

EXAMS chemical files. This approach employs PRZM, which simulates the processes in the 

agricultural field, such as runoff and erosion, on a daily time step. The runoff and erosion flux 

output data from PRZM are used as chemical loadings to EXAMS, which simulates surface water 

in order to predict the EECs. Pesticide loading is assumed to occur from a 10 hectare field that 

drains into a pond with an area of 1 hectare and a depth of 2 meters. This watershed geometry is 

commonly referred to as the “standard pond.” Further details of the exposure models are discussed 

in Appendix C and on the web at http://epa.gov/oppefed1/models/water/index.htm. Five PRZM 

field (crop) scenarios were modeled: OR snapbeans, FL cabbage (surrogate for brassica), MI 

bean, OR berry and MN sugarbeet (surrogate for ginseng). An effort was made to cover all the 

crop groups. In the absence of a standard berries scenario, an OP’s scenario was utilized (OR 

berries). The scenario is suitable for characterization purposes. In the absence of a ginseng 

scenario, a surrogate scenario was utilized, the MN sugarbeet was considered similar in 

characteristics; furthermore, it is located in a state where ginseng is usually grown. The scenario 

utilized to represent brassica was FL cabbage, it was also considered similar in characteristics. 

This scenario had the particularity that the modeling required soil incorporation. EECs for 

ecological risk assessment were determined using a pond modeling scenario which describes a 

generic scenario for the EXAMS component of the modeling exercise.

Since fluazinam and its residues, bind to organic carbon (KOC = 1705-2316 mg/L) and could

eventually accumulate in aquatic sediments, toxic exposure to organisms living in this media is a 

concern. EFED has estimated fluazinam and its residues sediment exposure to benthic organisms 

by calculating pore water exposure values using the PRZM/EXAMS model. Screening level RQs 

for sediment dwelling organisms were estimated with an extrapolation method recommended by
12

the Office of Water (USEPA). This was based on the Agency Equilibrium Partitioning Sediment 

Guidelines (ESG) under the Clean Water Act [CWA Section 304(a)(2)]. After consultation with 

the OW, EFED adopted the equilibrium partitioning (EqP) sediment method to be used when 

sediment toxicity and exposure data are not available (Appendix C). This extrapolation method is 

useful for estimating potential sediment exposure values, as well as sediment toxicity values that 

can be used in a screening level risk assessment. The EqP theory holds that a nonionic compound 

in the sediment partitions between sediment organic carbon, interstitial (pore) water and benthic 

organisms (Di Toro et al., 1991, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2000). At equilibrium, if 

the concentration in any phase is known, then the concentration in the other phases can be 

predicted through the organic/ carbon soil partition coefficient. The EECs are calculated from the 

pore water concentration (an output from PRZM/ EXAMS) through the KOC. 

For the terrestrial assessment, residues in or on potential dietary sources for mammals and birds 

were estimated using the Tier 1 model TREX. The focus of terrestrial wildlife exposure estimates 

is for birds and mammals with an exposure route emphasis on uptake of treated food. In this TIER 

I assessment, it was assumed that organisms are exposed to parent fluazinam in a given exposure 

scenario. 

b. Measures of Effect 

Measures of effect are based on deleterious changes in a receptor as a result of chemical exposure. 

Functionally, measures of effect typically used in risk assessments include changes in survival, 

reproduction, or growth as determined from standard laboratory toxicity tests. The focus on these 

effects for quantitative risk assessment is due to their clear relationship to higher-order ecological 

systems (i.e. populations, communities, ecosystems). Although effects other than survival, 

reproduction, and growth may be considered, rarely are they used quantitatively to estimate risks 

since, in many cases, the relationship between these non-standard endpoints and higher-order 

impacts is tenuous at best. Commonly used laboratory-derived toxicity values include estimates of 

acute mortality (e.g., LD50, LC50) and estimates of effects due to longer term, chronic exposures 

(e.g., NOAEL, NOAEC) (Appendix H). More details concerning measures of effects used in this 

assessment can be found in the Ecological Effects Characterization section.

c. Measures of Ecosystem and Receptor Characteristics 

Field studies are not available to determine the indirect effects to plant and animal communities in 

wetland and riparian habitats along freshwater/marine water bodies near target fields or to forest 

and edge habitats adjacent to target fields. The assessment endpoints specified in the following 

table can be summarized as survival, growth, and reproduction of terrestrial and aquatic receptors 

to include birds, mammals, reptiles, amphibian, fish, invertebrates, and plants. The response of 

these receptors to exposure is represented by a small number of toxicity studies on representative 

or surrogate species. Thus, there is considerable uncertainty regarding the response of a receptor, 

since data for all species potentially exposed are not available. The most sensitive available 

measure of effect for a given assessment endpoint is used to accommodate for some of this inherent 

uncertainty. However, the extent to which this is sufficient is unknown. 
13

The ecosystems selected for modeling using PRZM/EXAMS for the aquatic assessment and 

T-REX for the terrestrial animal assessment are intended to be generally representative of any

aquatic or terrestrial ecosystem associated with areas where fluazinam may be applied. For aquatic 

assessments, freshwater and estuarine/marine fish, invertebrates, and plants are represented. For 

terrestrial assessments, mammals and birds are represented by most vulnerable size, and treated 

food is used as primary foraging category. 

Assessment Endpoints for Ecological Risk Assessment 

Taxonomic 

Group

Assessment 

Endpoint

Measures of Effect

(Toxicity Endpoints)

Measures of Exposure

(Exposure Endpoints)

Birds

Survival

Oral LD50 and dietary LC50 (most 

sensitive species), adjusted for size for 20 

g bird

Maximum residue on food items (foliar) 

or LD50/ft2

Reproduction, 

Growth

NOAEC/LOAEC from avian chronic 

study (most sensitive species)

Maximum residue on food items (foliar) 

or LD50/ft2

Mammals

Survival

Acute oral LD50, dietary LC50 (most 

sensitive species)

Maximum concentration on food items 

(foliar) or LD50/ft2

Reproduction, 

Growth

NOAEC/LOAEC from chronic 

reproduction study (most sensitive 

species) Maximum concentration on food items

Non-target 

Terrestrial 

Invertebrates Survival Honey-bee acute contact LD50 Maximum application rate

Terrestrial Plants 

Survival and 

Growth Tier I, Tier II plant toxicity data; EC25 Estimates of runoff to non-target areas

Freshwater Fish

Survival 96-hr LC50 (most sensitive species) Peak EEC

Reproduction, 

Growth

Fish Early Life Stage NOAEC/LOAEC 

for Growth 60-day average EEC 

Freshwater 

Invertebrate

Survival 48-hr LC50 (most sensitive species) Peak EEC

Reproduction, 

Growth Invertebrate Life Cycle NOAEC 21-day average EEC

Marine/estuarine 

Fish

Survival 96-hr LC50 (most sensitive species) Peak EEC

Reproduction, 

Growth

Estuarine/Marine Fish NOAEC for 

growth 60-day average EEC

Marine/estuarine 

Invertebrate

Survival 48-hr EC50 (most sensitive species) Peak EEC

Reproduction, 

Growth

NOAEC for reproduction for most 

sensitive species 21-day average EEC
14

Assessment Endpoints for Ecological Risk Assessment 

Taxonomic 

Group

Assessment 

Endpoint

Measures of Effect

(Toxicity Endpoints)

Measures of Exposure

(Exposure Endpoints)

Aquatic Plants Survival, Growth Tier I, Tier II plant toxicity estimates; 

EC25

1-in-10 year peak concentration

III. Analysis

1. Use Characterization 

This assessment is intended to address the proposed new IR-4 uses of Fluazinam as a treatment for 

various blights and molds. The proposed new IR-4 uses (D338293 and D338294) are for treatment 

of Legume Vegetable Subgroup 6A, Bushberry Subgroup 13B, Brassica Leafy Vegetable Crop 

Group 5, Ginseng, Dry Bean, Lima Bean and Succulent Bean Crop Subgroup 6B. Taken together, 

these commodities are grown throughout the United States. 

Fluazinam is a protectant and contact fungicide with a multi-site mode of action that exerts 

fungicidal action by disrupting the production of energy at several metabolic sites within the fungal 

cell. A synopsis of the proposed use pattern for this chemical is provided below.

Proposed Fluazinam Usage Pattern

Crop Maximum

Application 

rate

(lb a.i./A)

Maximum

Application per

Season

(lb 

a.i./A/season)

Number of

Applications

Minimum

Application

Interval

Legume 

Vegetables and 

Dry Bean and 

Succulent 

Subgroup 6B

0.44 0.91 2 7 da

Brassica 2.00 2.00 1 N/A

Ginseng 0.52

0.78

3.12

3.12

6

4

7-14 da

7-14 da

Bushberry

Subgroup

0.65 3.90 6 7 da
15

B. Exposure Characterization 

Environmental Fate and Transport Characterization

Summary of Various Physico-Chemical and Environmental Fate Properties of Fluazinam

Parameter Value Reference/Comments *

Selected Physical/Chemical Parameters

Water Solubility (25oC) 0.025 mg/L @ pH 5.5, 0.071 @ pH 7.0 MRID 42208403

Vapor pressure 8.25x10-6 mm Hg MRID 42248403

Molecular Formula C13H4Cl2F6N4O2

Molecular Weight 465.1 g/mol

CAS No. 79622-59-6

CAS name 3-chloro-N-[3-chloro-2,6-dinitro-4-(trifluoromethyl)phenyl]-5-(trifluoromethyl)-2-

pyridinamine

IUPAC name 3-chloro-N-(3-chloro-5-trifluoromethyl-2-pyridyl)-α,α,α-trifluoro-2,6-dinitro-ptoluidine

Henry’s Law Constant 6.73 x 10-7atm-m

3

/mol PMRA Reg. Note REG2003-12

Octanol/Water Partition, Log Kow 3620, 3.56 @20°C MRID 42248403

Persistence: 

 Fluazinam Fluaz.+Degradates 

Hydrolysis t1/2 pH 5

pH 7

pH 9

stable

42 days

6 days

stable

stable

stable

MRID 42208412 (c)

Photolysis t1/2 in water 2.5 days, dark 

control ≈stable

one degradate MRID 44807312, 43521009(s)

on soil 35.0 days, value 

corrected for dark 

control

degradates at ≤10% 

of the applied

MRID 44807313 (s)

Soil metabolism Aerobic t1/2 132 days degradates at ≤10% 

of the app.

MRID 42208413 (c)

Aquatic metabolism Aerobic DT50 4.0-7.4 hours 51-71 days MRID 44807314 (c)

Aquatic metabolism Anaerobic t1/2 ≈ 1⁄3 day (or 

approximately 8 

hours)

stable MRID 43521010 (c)
16

Summary of Various Physico-Chemical and Environmental Fate Properties of Fluazinam

Parameter Value Reference/Comments *

Mobility/Adsorption-Desorption

Batch Equilibrium - Unaged

Aged Soil Column Leaching

Batch Equilibrium HYPA

Batch Equilibrium CAPA

4 soils Kads=11-44 KOC=1700-1900

 Kdes=34-507 KOC=7000-19900

0.66% in leachate

6 soils Kads=6.6-51 KOC=640-3200

4 soils Kads=4.9-67 KOC=1289-3784

MRID 42248628, 42974913 (c)

MRID 42208415 (c)

MRID 43528201 (c)

MRID 44807315 (s)

Field Dissipation

Terrestrial Dissipation

t1/2 in soil surface layer

range from 9 to 49 days MRID 44807318, 44807320, 

44807316, 44807319, 44807317 (s)

Bioaccumulation

Accumulation in Fish, max. BCF 273-348 X for fillet portion

960-1220 X for whole fish

1410-1850 X for non-edible

MRID 43521012 (c)

(c) = core study that fulfills guideline requirement; (s) = supplemental study; (u) = unacceptable study

Where two values are stated, they may correspond to two radiolabel positions.

Note: For nomenclature of degradates of fluazinam, please, refer to the Appendix. 

EFED concludes that fluazinam appears to degrade at moderate to low rates in aerobic soils, but it 

is more rapidly transformed into other compounds of similar backbone structure in high pH 

solutions or in aerobic or anaerobic aquatic media. The transformation products of fluazinam 

appear to be relatively persistent under most conditions. Fluazinam may be photolysed relatively

rapidly in water, resulting in a tricyclic compound. While the parent and two transformation 

products, HYPA and CAPA, have relatively low mobility, indicating low potential for ground 

water contamination, there is uncertainty about the other transformation products and further 

information on them should be required in a new Terrestrial Field Dissipation Study. 

Hydrolysis 

The hydrolysis of fluazinam is pH dependent. It was relatively stable at pH 5, and hydrolyzed with 

half-lives of 42 and 6 days at pH’s of 7 and 9, respectively. The major degradate was CAPA.

Photolysis 

Fluazinam photolyses in aqueous solutions mainly to G-504, a tricyclic compound, and possibly

one or more other unidentified products. The half-life obtained in the study was 2.5 days. The soil 

photolysis, on the other hand, the half-life was 22 days (compared to 69 days for the dark control). 

The available data has been deemed supplemental at this time. Additional data on both photolysis 

studies have been requested.

Metabolism 

The metabolism of fluazinam appears to be moderate in soils (DT50 ≤ 30 days) in a sandy loam soil. 

The calculated half-life was about 132 days, which is in agreement with the fact that after 361 days, 
17

6.8 and 9.5% of the applied fluazinam remained intact for the 14C-Pyridyl and 14C-Phenyl labels, 

respectively. No major degradation products were observed in this study, but a major fraction 

(~41%) was bound material at the end of the study (day 361).

Sediment/Water Systems 

The aerobic aquatic and the anaerobic aquatic metabolism studies resulted in very short half-lives 

(≤8 hours in both studies). In addition, in such studies, various metabolites were formed. All the 

major transformation products have structures that resemble the structure of the parent. The sum 

of the amount of the parent concentration plus the concentrations of the degradates (total fluazinam 

residues) decreases very slowly in both cases. The major transformation products observed in 

these studies include DAPA, SDS-67200, AMPA, DCPA, and CAPA.

Mobility 

In batch equilibrium studies, fluazinam shows low mobility in four soils tested. KOC values ranged 

from 1705-2316. Similarly, an available soil column leaching study of aged fluazinam indicated 

low mobility of the residues of fluazinam. Less than 1% of the applied radiocarbon was found in 

the leachates and >>80% remained at the top of the soil columns. There is mobility information for 

two of the transformation products of fluazinam: HYPA and CAPA. Of them, HYPA appeared to 

be generally more mobile (KOC=620-3100, 6 soils), and CAPA appeared to be generally less 

mobile than the parent (KOC=1289-3784, 4 soils). These two batch/equilibrium studies were 

conducted on sterile soils.

Field Dissipation 

Four terrestrial field dissipation studies were submitted by the registrant. Such studies were found 

to provide only limited supplemental information. In particular, the data about the degradates is 

very questionable due to poor recoveries in a storage stability study. In general, it appeared that 

parent fluazinam degraded moderately rapidly in studies conducted in Ephrata, Washington, 

Kempton, North Dakota, Porterville, California, and Monctezuma, Georgia. The dissipation 

half-lives ranged from 9 to 49 days. These half-lives are in agreement with the aerobic soil 

metabolism half-life.

Bioaccumulation 

Fluazinam demonstrated some potential to bioaccumulate in fish. The maximum BCF’s were 

348X for fillet, 1220 for whole fish, and 1850 for viscera, all of which were obtained with the 

phenyl label material. Depuration appears to be slow. More than 67% of the residues were 

eliminated from the fillet during the 21-day depuration phase.

Measures of Aquatic Exposure

a. Aquatic Exposure Modeling

Exposure to aquatic organisms is assumed to occur through direct contact with contaminated water. 

Aquatic exposures can be estimated from monitoring data or by simulation modeling. In the 

absence of suitable monitoring data, the EFED chose to measure exposure by the use of a 
18

simulation model for fluazinam. Aquatic exposure estimates are generated from EFED models and 

incorporate maximum proposed use rates and empirically-derived fate properties. For agricultural 

uses, exposure concentrations for aquatic ecosystem assessments were estimated based on EFED’s 

Tier 2 aquatic model PRZM/EXAMS. A graphical user interface (pe4v01.pl), developed by the 

USEPA, was used to facilitate inputting chemical and use specific parameters into the appropriate 

PRZM input files (inp) and EXAMS chemical files. This approach employs PRZM, which 

simulates the processes in the agricultural field, such as runoff and erosion, on a daily time step. 

The runoff and erosion flux output data from PRZM are used as chemical loadings to EXAMS, 

which simulates surface water in order to predict the EECs. Pesticide loading is assumed to occur 

from a 10 hectare field that drains into a pond with an area of 1 hectare and a depth of 2 meters. 

This watershed geometry is commonly referred to as the “standard pond.” Further details of the 

exposure models are discussed in Appendix C and on the web at 

http://epa.gov/oppefed1/models/water/index.htm. Five PRZM field (crop) scenarios were 

modeled: OR snapbeans, FL cabbage, MI bean, OR berry and MN sugarbeet (surrogate for 

ginseng). An effort was made to cover all the new crops. EECs for ecological risk assessment 

were determined using a pond modeling scenario which describes a generic scenario for the 

EXAMS component of the modeling exercise. The location of the field is specific to the crop 

being simulated using site specific information on the soils, weather, cropping, and management 

factors associated with the scenario. The crop/location scenario in a specific state is intended to 

represent a high-end vulnerable site on which the crop is normally grown. Based on historical 

rainfall patterns, the pond receives multiple runoff events during the years simulated. Maximum 

application rates and relevant environmental fate parameters were used in the screening model 

PRZM/EXAMS in estimating concentrations in surface water.

In the absence of a standard berries scenario, an OP’s scenario was utilized (OR berries). The 

scenario is suitable for characterization purposes. In the absence of a ginseng scenario, a surrogate 

scenario was utilized, the MN sugarbeet is similar in characteristics, and it was also considered 

similar because it is located in a state where ginseng is grown. The scenario utilized to represent 

brassica was FL cabbage, it is the standard scenario that most closely resembles brassica

characteristics. This scenario had the particularity that the modeling required soil incorporation.

A table with the input parameters in PRZM/EXAMS is presented below:

Table of Input Parameters Utilized in PRZM/EXAMS for Fluazinam

Parameter (units) Value(s) Sources Comments

Output File Name fluazina --- ---

Chemical Name Fluazinam Label Omega 500F label (EPA Reg. No. 

71512-1).

Crop Name OR snap bean 

FL cabbage (for brassica)

MI bean

OR berries

MN sugarbeets (for ginseng)

Label Omega 500F label (EPA Reg. No. 

71512-1)

Application Rate (Kg a.i./ha)

ORsnapbean 0.493

FLcabbage 2.242

MIbean 0.493

Label Omega 500F label (EPA Reg. No. 

71512-1). Label application rate:

ORsnapbean 0.44 lb a.i./A

FLcabbage 2.00 lb a.i./A

MIbean 0.44 lb a.i./A
19

Table of Input Parameters Utilized in PRZM/EXAMS for Fluazinam

Parameter (units) Value(s) Sources Comments

ORberry 0.729

MNsugarbeet 0.874

ORberry 0.65 lb a.i./A

MNsugarbeet 0.78 lb a.i./A

Day of Application (day-month)/ 

pre-harvest interval ORsnapbean 31-07

FLcabbage 22-12

MIbean 17-07

ORberry 14-05

MNsugarbeet 08-08

Label PHI:

ORsnapbean 14

FLcabbage 50

MIbean 30

ORberry 30

MNsugarbeet 30

Estimated from metadata file and 

proposed labels.

Number of Applications Allowed ORsnapbean 2

FLcabbage 1

MIbean 2

ORberry 6

MNsugarbeet 4

Label Omega 500F label (EPA Reg. No. 

71512-1).

Interval between Applications 

(days)

ORsnapbean 7

FLcabbage N/A

MIbean 7

ORberry 7

MNsugarbeet 7

Label Omega 500F label (EPA Reg. No. 

71512-1).

CAM (Chemical application 

method) ORsnapbean 2

FLcabbage 4

MIbean 2

ORberry 2

MNsugarbeet 2

Label Omega 500F label (EPA Reg. No. 

71512-1). 2=linear foliar based on 

crop canopy for all crops except FL

cabbage; 4=soil applied, user 

defined incorporation depth, 

uniform with depth for FL cabbage

IPSCND (Flag indicating the 

disposition of pesticide remaining 

on foliage after harvest)

ORsnapbean 1

FLcabbage N/A

MIbean 1

ORberry 1

MNsugarbeet 1

1, pesticide remaining on foliage is 

converted to surface application to 

the top soil layer

DEPI = Incorporation Depth 0.0 in for all crops, except 

FLcabbage (15.2 cm)

Label Omega 500F label (EPA Reg. No. 

71512-1).

KOC 1957.5 MRID: 42248628, 

42974913, 46235732

Represents the average KOC value 

among four values ranging from 

1705 to 2316 ml/g; the KOC model 

was utilized because it represents 

better the mobility of fluazinam.

Aerobic Soil Metabolism (days) 396 MRID: 42208413 3X the available value, to account 

for the uncertainty in the availability 

of only one value.

Method of Application Ground for all crops, except 

FLcabbage (soil incorporated)

Label Omega 500F label (EPA Reg. No. 

71512-1).

Buffer Zone (ft.) N/A Label Omega 500F label (EPA Reg. No. 

71512-1).

Application Efficiency (fraction) 0.99 for ground application

1.00 for FLcabbage

--- EFED guidance on input parameters 

for PRZM/EXAMS dated 2/28/02

Spray Drift (fraction) 0.01 for ground application

0.00 for FLcabbage

--- EFED guidance on input parameters 

for PRZM/EXAMS dated 2/28/02

Solubility in Water (ppm) 0.71 MRID: 42208403 10X the actual solubility as per 

EFED guidance on input parameters 

for PRZM/EXAMS.

Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism 

(days)

91.7 MRID: 44807314 Represents the 90th percentile of the 

upper confidence bound on the 

mean of two half-life values: 51 and 

71 days; mean = 61 days; std. dev. 

= 14.1 days. These values 

correspond to the total residues, not 

to the parent fluazinam.

Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism 

(days)

0 MRID: 43521010 Fluazinam and its transformation 

products are nearly stable as a whole 

in anaerobic aquatic environment.

Hydrolysis at pH 7 half-life (days) 42 MRID: 42208412 ---
20

Table of Input Parameters Utilized in PRZM/EXAMS for Fluazinam

Parameter (units) Value(s) Sources Comments

Aqueous Photolysis @ pH 7 (days) 2.5 MRID: 44807312, 

43521009

---

Molecular Weight (g/mole) 465.1 PMRA Regulatory Note 

REG2003-12, 10/27/03

Vapor Pressure (torr or mmHg) 8.25 x 10-6 MRID: 42248403

Henry’s Law Constant

(atm-m

3

/mol)

6.73 x 10-7PMRA Reg. Note 

REG2003-12, 10/27/03

Environment pond298.exv --- Default for pond scenario, as 

Field Size Pond --- opposed to index reservoir.

Runoff none --- ---

PRZM Scenario ORsnbeansC.txt

FLcabbageC.txt

MIbeansC.txt

ORberriesOP.txt

MNsugarbeetC.txt

--- It is noted that the OR berries 

scenario was created for 

organo-phosphates; however, it is 

useful for characterization of other 

chemicals as well.

Metfile Scenario w24232.dvf

w12842.dvf

w14826.dvf

w24232.dvf

w14914.dvf

--- As indicated by the shell (pe4).

FEXTRC, Foliar extraction 0.5 EFED guidance on input parameters 

for PRZM/EXAMS dated 2/28/02

PLDKRT, Decay rate on foliage 0 EFED guidance on input parameters 

for PRZM/EXAMS dated 2/28/02

PLVKRT, Volatilization rate from 

foliage

0 EFED guidance on input parameters 

for PRZM/EXAMS dated 2/28/02

UPTKF, Uptake factor 0 EFED guidance on input parameters 

for PRZM/EXAMS dated 2/28/02

Write Benthic Pore Water 

Concentrations?

Yes --- Necessary to calculate the benthic 

risk quotients.

Acute risk assessments are performed using the peak EEC values for single and multiple 

applications, according to the label. Chronic risk assessments for aquatic invertebrates and fish are 

performed using the average 21-day and 60-day EECs, respectively. For a given crop, only the 

highest EECs are presented in the table; however, results from all modeled scenarios are provided 

in the Appendix C. The PRZM/EXAMS input and output files are also presented in the Appendix

C.

Estimated environmental concentrations of fluazinam (ppb) in the water column and benthic pore 

water.

Crop Scenario Media Peak 21-day 60-day

FL cabbage soil 

incorporated a

*2.00 (1) 2.00

Water Column 2.10 1.28 0.84

Benthic Pore Water 0.557 0.553 0.538

MI bean ground a

*0.44 (2) 0.88

Water Column 9.30 6.71 5.17

Benthic Pore Water 4.10 4.07 3.95

MN sugarbeet ground a

*0.78 (4) 3.12

Water Column 16.87 12.02 7.42

Benthic Pore Water 4.87 4.83 4.78

OR berries ground a

*0.65 (6) 3.90

Water Column 6.59 4.22 2.90

Benthic Pore Water 2.55 2.48 2.33

OR snapbeans grounda Water Column 7.89 5.82 4.60
21

Estimated environmental concentrations of fluazinam (ppb) in the water column and benthic pore 

water.

Crop Scenario Media Peak 21-day 60-day

*0.44 (2) 0.88 Benthic Pore Water 4.14 4.12 3.69

a

 A chosen representative scenario for spray or soil incorporated applications of fluazinam to agricultural crops (sugarbeet, a surrogate 

scenario for ginseng).

Equilibrium Partitioning and Concentration in the Sediment/Pore water

As mentioned previously, fluazinam and its residues are lipophilic compounds that can adsorb 

readily to particulate and sediment, thus possibly limiting its exposure to aquatic life in the water 

column but increasing toxic exposure in the benthos. Sediment can act as a reservoir for lipophilic 

persistent compounds. The sediment and particulate likely adsorb a relatively high percentage of 

fluazinam residues, as indicated by their relatively high KOC (mean KOC around 1960 for the 

parent). Therefore, coupled with their persistence in anaerobic environments, sediment bound 

fluazinam residues could present a toxicity risk for benthic aquatic life and aquatic ecosystems in 

general. 

Therefore, in order to assess this potential for pesticide risk to aquatic benthic systems, the 

Environmental Fate and Effects Division (EFED) of the Office of Pesticides Program (OPP) has 

adopted the method used by the Office of Water that relies on equilibrium partitioning (EqP) of 

chemicals. The EqP theory is based on the hydrophobicity and concentrations of the chemical 

normalized to organic carbon (OC) in sediment (De Toro et al. 1991) and holds that a nonionic 

chemical in sediment partitions between sediment organic carbon, interstitial (pore) water and 

benthic organisms. At equilibrium, if the concentration in any phase is known, then the 

concentration in the other phases can be predicted. A key component to this theory is the chemicals 

organic carbon coefficient (Koc), which is constant for every chemical and represents the ratio of 

the chemical concentration in water to the concentration in organic carbon. The document, 

“Technical Basis for the Derivation of Equilibrium Partitioning Sediment Guidelines (ESGs) for 

the Protection of Benthic Organisms: Nonionic Organics” (USEPA, 2000), demonstrates that 

biological responses of benthic organisms to nonionic organic chemicals in sediments are different 

when the sediment concentrations are expressed on a dry weight basis, but similar when expressed 

on a ug chemical/g organic carbon basis (ug/goc). Similar responses were also observed across 

sediments when interstitial water concentrations were used to normalize biological availability. 

The Technical Basis Document further demonstrates that if the toxic effect concentration in water 

is known (e.g., LC50), the effect concentration in sediment on a ug/goc basis can be predicted by

multiplying the effect concentration in water by the chemical Koc.

 (LC50 ug/L x Koc L/kgoc x 1 kgoc/1000goc = LC50 ug/goc)

Since, EFED uses a deterministic method for its screening level risk assessment, the calculation of 

risk quotient values (RQ) is important for assessing possible risk. The RQ values are calculated by

taking the ratio of the estimated exposure concentrations (EEC) to the toxicity effect value (e.g., 

LC50, NOAEC). The EEC values are model generated (e.g., PRZM/ EXAMS) and reflect peer 

evaluated and approved scenarios for assessing pesticide exposure to an aquatic environment. 
22

However, the PRZM/ EXAMS output produces water column EEC values, as well as sediment and 

pore water EEC values. Therefore, to assess possible toxic pesticide exposure to aquatic organisms 

from sediments, EFED is using the PRZM/ EXAMS to generate EECs for sediment and pore water 

model based on the principles of the equilibrium partitioning theory. By relying on sediment and/or 

pore water output values, EFED has two ways for calculating RQ values for sediments by using 

pore water exposure values and bulk sediment values. 

The calculations that rely on pore water can be calculated by dividing the PRZM/ EXAMS output 

value for pore water concentrations by the dissolved concentrations in the water column that 

caused toxicity in bioassays using fluazinam residues or fluazinam TGAI (e.g., LC50).

 EEC pore water ug/L / LC50 ugL

If sediment effects data are available (LC50 ug/kgoc), RQ can be produced by using the PRZM/ 

EXAMS sediment output value for sediment. 

EEC sediment ug/ugoc / LC50 ug/kgoc

Additional details on the equilibrium partitioning theory can be found in Appendix C.

b. Aquatic Exposure monitoring and field data

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) began its NAWQA (National Water Quality Assessment) 

program in 1991, systematically collecting chemical, biological, and physical water quality data 

from 42 study units (basins) across the nation. Today, NAWQA has a compendium of data for all 

the nation. A search of its database, yielded two groundwater measurements in Alabama (Houston 

County), with non-detects (<0.020 ug/L).

3. Measure of Terrestrial Exposure

a. Terrestrial Exposure Modeling

A primary concern is that birds and mammals may be exposed shortly after application through 

dietary exposure to treated food or when foraging in the fields for nesting material. Therefore 

estimation of pesticide concentrations in wildlife food items focuses on quantifying possible 

dietary ingestion treated food items. The EFED terrestrial exposure model T-REX is used to 

estimate exposures and risk to avian and mammalian species. Input values for avian and 

mammalian toxicity as well as chemical application rate data are required to run the model. The 

model provides estimates of environmental exposure concentrations (EECs) and risk quotients 

(RQs). The concentration (ppm) on treated food items is calculated by multiplying the application 

rate provided in the labels with the EEC estimates. 

C. Ecological Effects Characterization

In screening-level ecological risk assessments, effects characterization describes the types of 
23

effects a pesticide can produce in an aquatic or terrestrial organism. This characterization is based 

on registrant-submitted studies that describe acute and chronic effects toxicity information for 

various aquatic and terrestrial animals and plants. A summary of the results of the 

registrant-submitted toxicity studies used to characterize effects for this risk assessment can be 

found in the Appendix. Toxicity testing reported in this section does not represent all species of 

birds, mammals, or aquatic organisms. Only a few surrogate species for both freshwater fish and 

birds are used to represent all freshwater fish (2000+) and bird (680+) species in the United States. 

For mammals, acute studies are usually limited to Norway rat or the house mouse. 

Estuarine/marine testing is usually limited to a crustacean, a mollusk, and a fish. Also, neither 

reptiles nor amphibians are tested. The risk assessment assumes that avian and reptilian toxicities 

are similar. The same assumption is used for fish and aquatic amphibians.

Aquatic Effects Characterization 

Fluazinam is considered to be very highly toxic to highly toxic to fish (freshwater and 

estuarine/marine) on an acute basis (LC50 = 0.036 - 0.11 ppm). Chronic freshwater 

NOAEC/LOAEC values were calculated at 0.0053 - 0.00069 ppm and 0.010 - 0.014 ppm, 

respectively, with larval survival, reduced number of spawns, and growth as the endpoints effected. 

Acute toxicity values for aquatic invertebrates suggest that fluazinam is highly toxic to freshwater 

invertebrates (Daphnia EC50 = 0.18 - 0.22 ppm) and very highly toxic to estuarine/marine 

invertebrates (oyster EC50 = 0.0047 and mysid shrimp EC50 = 0.039 ppm ). Chronic toxicity to 

invertebrates is only represented through the Daphnia magna life cycle where the NOAEC was 

calculated at 0.068 ppm and the LOAEC at 0.140 ppm. The endpoints affected for this study were 

reproductive (reduced number of young per female) and growth effects. 

Terrestrial effects Characterization 

The available toxicity data suggests that Fluazinam appears to be practically nontoxic to avian 

species on a subacute basis (mallard and Bobwhite quail LC50 > 10,500 ppm). Chronic toxicity

data show that fluazinam exposure can result in growth reduction in young (14-day old survivors 

weight) with a NOAEC = 200 - 350 ppm and LOAEC = 350 - 500 ppm.

Mammalian toxicity data suggest that this compound is practically nontoxic to small mammals on 

an acute basis (rat LD50 = 4,300 mg/kg). Reproductive effects that were based on a decreased 

number of implantation sites and decreased litter size were noted at an LOAEC = 500 ppm 

(NOAEC = 100 ppm). Acute toxicity on honeybees show that fluazinam is practically nontoxic to 

bees (LD50 > 200 ug/bee).

IV. Risk Characterization

A. Risk Estimation – Integration of Exposure and Effects data

A means of integrating the results of exposure and ecotoxicity data is called the deterministic 

method. For this method, risk quotients (RQs) are calculated by dividing exposure estimates by

ecotoxicity values, both acute and chronic. Terrestrial risk for foliar applications were determined 
24

through the calculation of RQs by comparing EECs to toxicity endpoints.

RQ = EXPOSURE/TOXICITY 

RQs are then compared to OPP's levels of concern (LOCs). These LOCs are criteria used by OPP 

to indicate potential risk to non-target organisms and the need to consider regulatory action. The 

criteria indicate that a pesticide used as directed has the potential to cause adverse effects on 

non-target organisms. LOCs currently address the following risk presumption categories: (1) 

acute high - potential for acute risk is high, regulatory action may be warranted in addition to 

restricted use classification (2) acute restricted use - the potential for acute risk is high, but this 

may be mitigated through restricted use classification (3) acute endangered species - the potential 

for acute risk to endangered species is high, regulatory action may be warranted, and (4) chronic 

risk - the potential for chronic risk is high, regulatory action may be warranted. Currently, EFED 

does not perform assessments for chronic risk to plants, acute or chronic risks to non-target insects, 

or chronic risk from granular/bait formulations to mammalian or avian species.

The ecotoxicity test values (i.e., measurement endpoints) used in the acute and chronic risk 

quotients are derived from the results of required studies. Examples of ecotoxicity values derived 

from the results of short-term laboratory studies that assess acute effects are: (1) LC50 (fish and 

birds) (2) LD50 (birds and mammals) (3) EC50 (aquatic plants and aquatic invertebrates) and (4) 

EC25 (terrestrial plants). An example of a toxicity test effect level derived from the results of 

long-term laboratory studies that assess chronic effects is: (1) NOAEC (birds, fish and aquatic 

invertebrates). Risk presumptions, along with the corresponding RQs and LOCs are tabulated 

below:

Risk Presumptions for Terrestrial Animals

Risk Presumption RQ LOC

Birds:

Acute High Risk EEC1/LC50 or LD50/sqft2or LD50/day30.5

Acute Restricted Use EEC/LC50 or LD50/sqft or LD50/day (or LD50 < 50 mg/kg) 0.2

Acute Endangered Species EEC/LC50 or LD50/sqft or LD50/day 0.1

Chronic Risk EEC/NOAEC 1

Wild Mammals:

Acute High Risk EEC/LC50 or LD50/sqft or LD50/day 0.5

Acute Restricted Use EEC/LC50 or LD50/sqft or LD50/day (or LD50 < 50 mg/kg) 0.2

Acute Endangered Species EEC/LC50 or LD50/sqft or LD50/day 0.1

Chronic Risk EEC/NOAEC 1

1

 abbreviation for Estimated Environmental Concentration (ppm) on avian/mammalian food items 

2

 mg/ft2 

3

 mg of toxicant consumed/day

 LD50 * wt. of bird LD50 * wt. of bird 
25

Risk Presumptions for Aquatic Animals

Risk Presumption RQ LOC

Acute High Risk EEC1/LC50 or EC50 0.5

Acute Restricted Use EEC/LC50 or EC50 0.1

Acute Endangered Species EEC/LC50 or EC50 0.05

Chronic Risk EEC/MATC or NOAEC 1

1

 EEC = (ppm or ppb) in water

Risk Presumptions for Plants

Risk Presumption RQ LOC

Terrestrial and Semi-Aquatic Plants:

Acute High Risk EEC1/EC25 1

Acute Endangered Species EEC/EC05 or NOAEC 1

Aquatic Plants:

Acute High Risk EEC2/EC50 1

Acute Endangered Species EEC/EC05 or NOAEC 1

1

 EEC = lbs ai/A 

2

 EEC = (ppb/ppm) in water 

Likelihood of Water Contamination

In order to evaluate exposure to aquatic organisms, EFED relied on the maximum peak EEC value 

generated through PRZM for acute risk, while chronic values for fish and invertebrates reflected 

60-day and 21-day PRZM averages, respectively.
2

2

Aquatic Organism Risk Assessment

Risk to Aquatic Organisms (Acute/Chronic)

The following tables provide aquatic acute and chronic RQ values for exposure to freshwater and 

estuarine/marine species relative to the proposed uses. 

i. Freshwater Fish

Acute and chronic risk quotients are tabulated below.

Risk Quotients for Freshwater Fish Based On a Rainbow Trout LC50 of 36 ppb and a fathead minnow NOAEC of 0.69 ppb.

PRZM Scenario

LC50

(ppb)

NOAEC

(ppb) Media

EEC

Peak

(ppb)

EEC

60-Day Ave.

(ppb)

Acute RQ 

(EEC/LC50)

Chronic RQ

(EEC/NOAEC or 

MATC) 

FL Cabbage 36 0.69 Water 

Column

2.10 0.538 0.06 0.78

MI Bean 36 0.69 Water 

Column

9.30 3.95 0.26 5.72

MN Sugarbeet 36 0.69 Water 

Column

16.87 4.78 0.47 6.93

OR Berries 36 0.69 Water 

Column

6.57 2.33 0.18 3.38

OR Snapbean 36 0.69 Water 

Column

7.89 3.69 0.22 5.35

An analysis of the results indicates that acute or chronic levels of concern are exceeded for 

freshwater fish.

ii. Freshwater Invertebrates

Acute and chronic LOCs are calculated below:

Risk Quotients for Freshwater Invertebrates Based On a Daphnia LC50 of 180 ppb and a Daphnia NOAEC of 68 ppb.

PRZM Scenario

LC50

(ppb)

NOAEC

(ppb) Media

EEC

Peak

(ppb)

EEC

21-Day Ave.

(ppb)

Acute RQ 

(EEC/LC50)

Chronic RQ

(EEC/NOAEC or 

MATC) 

FL Cabbage 180 68 Water 

Column

2.10 1.28 0.01 0.01

MI Bean 180 68 Water 

Column

9.30 6.71 0.05 0.14

MN Sugarbeet 180 68 Water 

Column

16.87 12.02 0.09 0.18

OR Berries 180 68 Water 

Column

6.57 4.22 0.02 0.06

OR Snapbean 180 68 Water 

Column

7.89 5.82 0.04 0.09

An analysis of the results indicates that the acute endangered species level of concern is exceeded 

for freshwater invertebrates only under the modeled bean and sugarbeet crop scenarios. No chronic 

levels of concern are exceeded for freshwater invertebrates for any crop use. 
3

3

iii. Estuarine/Marine Fish

Acute and chronic risk quotients are tabulated below.

Risk Quotients for Estuarine/Marine Fish Based on a Sheepshead Minnow LC50 of 120 ppb. The chronic study produced no effects.

PRZM Scenario

LC50

(ppb)

NOAEC

(ppb) Media

EEC

Peak

(ppb)

EEC

60-Day Ave.

(ppb)

Acute RQ 

(EEC/LC50)

Chronic RQ

(EEC/NOAEC or 

MATC) 

FL Cabbage 120 No 

Effects

Water 

Column

2.10 0.538 0.02 No Effects

MI Bean 120 No 

Effects

Water 

Column

9.30 3.95 0.08 No Effects

MN Sugarbeet 120 No 

Effects

Water 

Column

16.87 4.78 0.14 No Effects

OR Berries 120 No 

Effects

Water 

Column

6.57 2.33 0.05 No Effects

OR Snapbean 120 No 

Effects

Water 

Column

7.89 3.69 0.07 No Effects

An analysis of the results indicates that acute endangered species levels of concern are exceeded 

for estuarine/marine fish. Chronic LOCs cannot be calculated because there were no effects to fish 

in the submitted study (LOAEC >26ppb).

iv. Estuarine/Marine Invertebrates

Acute and chronic risk quotients are tabulated below.

Risk Quotients for Estuarine/Marine Aquatic Invertebrates Based on an Oyster EC50 of 4.7 ppb and a mysid NOAEC of 2 ppb.

PRZM Scenario

LC50

(ppb)

NOAEC

(ppb) Media

EEC

Peak

(ppb)

EEC

21-Day Ave.

(ppb)

Acute RQ 

(EEC/LC50)

Chronic RQ

(EEC/NOAEC or 

MATC) 

FL Cabbage 4.7 2.0 Water 

Column

2.10 1.28 0.45 0.64

MI Bean 4.7 2.0 Water 

Column

9.30 6.71 1.97 3.36

MN Sugarbeet 4.7 2.0 Water 

Column

16.87 12.02 3.59 2.01

OR Berries 4.7 2.0 Water 

Column

6.57 4.22 1.40 2.11

OR Snapbean 4.7 2.0 Water 

Column

7.89 5.82 1.68 2.91

An analysis of the results indicates that acute and chronic levels of concern are exceeded for 

endangered and non-endangered estuarine invertebrates.

v. Freshwater Benthic Dwelling Organisms

Acute and chronic LOCs are calculated below:
4

4

Risk Quotients for Freshwater Benthic Organisms Based On a Daphnia LC50 of 180 ppb and a Daphnia NOAEC of 68 ppb.

PRZM Scenario

LC50

(ppb)

NOAEC

(ppb) Media

EEC

Peak

(ppb)

EEC

21-Day Ave.

(ppb)

Acute RQ 

(EEC/LC50)

Chronic RQ

(EEC/NOAEC or 

MATC) 

FL Cabbage 180 68 Pore

Water

0.557 0.553 <0.00 0.01

MI Bean 180 68 Pore 

Water

4.10 4.07 0.02 0.06

MN Sugarbeet 180 68 Pore 

Water

4.87 4.83 0.03 0.07

OR Berries 180 68 Pore 

Water

2.55 2.48 0.01 0.04

OR Snapbean 180 68 Pore 

Water

4.14 4.12 0.02 0.06

An analysis of the results indicates that the acute endangered species level of concern is not 

exceeded for any of the crop scenarios listed. No chronic levels of concern are exceeded for 

freshwater benthic organisms for any crop use.

vi. Estuarine/Marine Benthic Organisms

Acute and chronic risk quotients are tabulated below.

Risk Quotients for Estuarine/Marine Benthic Organisms Based on an Oyster EC50 of 4.7 ppb and a mysid NOAEC of 2 ppb.

PRZM Scenario

LC50

(ppb)

NOAEC

(ppb) Media

EEC

Peak

(ppb)

EEC

21-Day Ave.

(ppb)

Acute RQ 

(EEC/LC50)

Chronic RQ

(EEC/NOAEC or 

MATC) 

FL Cabbage 4.7 2.0 Pore 

Water

0.557 0.553 0.11 0.28

MI Bean 4.7 2.0 Pore 

Water

4.10 4.07 0.87 2.04

MN Sugarbeet 4.7 2.0 Pore 

Water

4.87 4.83 1.03 2.42

OR Berries 4.7 2.0 Pore 

Water

2.55 2.48 0.54 1.24

OR Snapbean 4.7 2.0 Pore 

Water

4.14 4.12 0.88 2.06

An analysis of the results indicates that acute and chronic levels of concern are exceeded for 

endangered and non-endangered benthic organisms. 

d. Exposure and Risk to Nontarget Aquatic Plants

Exposure to non-target aquatic plants may occur through runoff or spray drift from adjacent treated 

sites or directly from such uses as aquatic weed or mosquito larvae control. RQs for an acute 

aquatic plant risk assessment are usually calculated from the most toxic surrogate. RQs are 

determined by dividing the pesticide's initial or peak concentration in water by the plant EC50 

value.
5

5

Acute risk quotients for non-vascular plants are tabulated below. 

PRZM Scenario

EC50

(ppb) Media

Peak

(ppb) Acute RQ

Fl Cabbage 180 Water 

Column

2.10 0.01

MI Bean 180 Water 

Column

9.30 0.05

MN Sugarbeet 180 Water 

Column

16.87 0.09

OR Berries 180 Water 

Column

6.57 0.04

OR Snapbean 180 Water 

Column

7.89 0.04

An analysis of the results indicates that the plant acute risk levels of concern and endangered 

species levels of concern are not exceeded for aquatic plants. Currently, EFED does not assess 

chronic risks to plants. 

a. Risk to Avian Species

The acute and chronic risk quotients for single broadcast application of Fluazinam products are 

tabulated below. 

Avian Acute and Chronic Risk Quotients for a Single Application (Broadcast) Based on a Bobwhite LC50 of >10,500 

ppm and a Bobwhite NOAEC of 200 ppm. 

Site/App. 

Method

App.

Rate 

(lbs ai/A) Food Items

Maximum EEC 

(ppm)* LC50 (ppm)

NOAEC

(ppm)

Acute RQ

(EEC/

LC50)

Chronic RQ

(EEC/

NOAEC)

Legumes 0.44 Short

grass

105 >10500 200 0.00 0.52

Tall

grass

48 >10500 200 0.00 0.24

Broadleaf

plants/Insects

59 >10500 200 0.00 0.30

Seeds 6.6 >10500 200 0.00 0.03
6

6

The acute and chronic risk quotients for single broadcast application of Fluazinam products are 

tabulated below. 

Avian Acute and Chronic Risk Quotients for a Single Application (Broadcast) Based on a Bobwhite LC50 of >10,500 

ppm and a Bobwhite NOAEC of 200 ppm. 

Site/App. 

Method

App.

Rate 

(lbs ai/A) Food Items

Maximum EEC 

(ppm)* LC50 (ppm)

NOAEC

(ppm)

Acute RQ

(EEC/

LC50)

Chronic RQ

(EEC/

NOAEC)

Brassica 1.352 Short

grass 324 >10500 200 0.00 1.62

Tall

grass 182 >10500 200 0.00 0.91

Broadleaf

plants/Insects 149 >10500 200 0.00 0.75

Seeds 20 >10500 200 0.00 0.10

Ginseng 0.52 Short

grass 125 >10500 200 0.00 0.63

Tall

grass 57 >10500 200 0.00 0.30

Broadleaf

plants/Insects 70 >10500 200 0.00 0.35

Seeds 8 >10500 200 0.00 0.04

Ginseng 0.78 Short

grass 187 >10500 200 0.00 0.94

Tall

grass 86 >10500 200 0.00 0.43

Broadleaf

plants/Insects 105 >10500 200 0.00 0.53

Seeds 12 >10500 200 0.00 0.06

Bushberry 0.65 Short

grass 156 >10500 200 0.00 0.80

Tall

grass 72 >10500 200 0.00 0.36

Broadleaf

plants/Insects 88 >10500 200 0.00 0.44

Seeds 10 >10500 200 0.00 0.05

* Based on maximum application rate.

 

An analysis of the results indicates that for single broadcast applications, no avian acute LOCs 

were exceeded since the LC50 is > 10,500 ppm. Chronic levels of concern are exceeded only for 

birds eating shortgrass under the brassica crop use.
7

7

The acute and chronic risk quotients for multiple broadcast application of Fluazinam products are 

tabulated below. 

Avian Acute and Chronic Risk Quotients for a Multiple Application (Broadcast) Based on a Bobwhite LC50 of >10,500 

ppm and a Bobwhite NOAEC of 200 ppm. 

Site/App. 

Method

App.

Rate 

(lbs ai/A) Food Items

Maximum EEC 

(ppm)* LC50 (ppm)

NOAEC

(ppm)

Acute RQ

(EEC/

LC50)

Chronic RQ

(EEC/

NOAEC)

Legumes 0.44 (2/7)

Short

grass

197 >10500 200 0.00 0.98

Tall

grass

111 >10500 200 0.00 0.55

Broadleaf

plants/Insects

90 >10500 200 0.00 0.45

Seeds 12 >10500 200 0.00 0.06

Ginseng 0.52 (6/7) Short

grass

544 >10500 200 0.00 2.72

Tall

grass

306 >10500 200 0.00 1.53

Broadleaf

plants/Insects

249 >10500 200 0.00 1.24

Seeds 34 >10500 200 0.00 0.17

Ginseng 0.78 (4/7) Short

grass

615 >10500 200 0.00 3.07

Tall

grass

346 >10500 200 0.00 1.73

Broadleaf

plants/Insects

282 >10500 200 0.00 1.41

Seeds

38 >10500 200 0.00 0.20

Bushberry 0.65 (6/7) Short

grass

680 >10500 200 0.00 3.40

Tall

grass

383 >10500 200 0.00 1.92

Broadleaf

plants/Insects

312 >10500 200 0.00 1.56

Seeds 42 >10500 200 0.00 0.21

* Based on maximum application rate.

An analysis of the results indicates that for multiple broadcast applications, no avian acute LOCs 

were exceeded since the LC50 is >10,500 ppm. Chronic levels of concern are exceeded for 

Ginseng and Bushberry Subgroup.
8

8

b. Risk to Mammals 

Estimating the potential for adverse effects to wild mammals is based upon EFED’s draft 1995 

SOP of mammalian risk assessments and methods used by Hoerger and Kenaga (1972) as modified 

by Fletcher et al., (1994). The concentration of fluazinam in the diet is expected to be acutely toxic 

to 50% of the test organisms is determined by dividing the LD50 value (usually the rat LD50) by the 

percent body weight consumed. A risk quotient is then determined by dividing the EEC by the 

acute toxicity value. 

 RQ = EEC (ppm) 

 LD50 (mg/kg)/ % Body weight consumed

RQ values are calculated for four different kinds of food (short grass, tall grass, forage/insects, and 

seeds) that are expected to be consumed by mammalian herbivores, insectivores, and granivores. 

The percent body weight consumed for herbivores and insectivores corresponding to the three 

weight categories (15, 35, and 1000 g) is assumed to be 95%, 66%, and 15%, respectively. 

Granivores are expected to have a different percent body weight consumption for the same weight 

categories (21%, 15%, and 3%, respectively). Chronic toxicity values were based on the NOAEC 

from a rat reproductive study. In order to evaluate chronic concerns, a maximum EEC was 

generated that takes into consideration pesticide half-life, application rate, number of applications, 

and intervals between applications (first order kinetics model).

Mammalian acute risk quotients for application of fluazinam. RQ’s are based on a rat 

(Rattus norvegicus) LD50 of 4,300 mg/kg. 

Crop

Application Rate lbs 

ai/A (# of 

applications/interval)

Body 

Wt.

(g)

% Body 

Wt. 

Consumed

Acute

RQ

Short

Grass

Acute

RQ

Forage and 

Small 

Insects

Acute

RQ

Large 

Insects

Acute 

RQ

Seeds

Legumes 0.44 (2/7) 15

35

1000

95/21

66/15

15/3

0.04

0.03

0.0

0.02

0.01

0.0

0.02

0.02

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

Ginseng 0.52 (6/7) 15

35

1000

95/21

66/15

15/3

0.12

0.08

0.02

0.05

0.04

0.01

0.06

0.05

0.01

0.0

0.0

0.0
9

9

Ginseng 0.78 (4/7) 15

35

1000

95/21

66/15

15/3

0.13

0.09

0.02

0.06

0.04

0.01

0.07

0.05

0.01

0.0

0.0

0.0

Bushberry 0.65 (6/7) 15

35

1000

95/21

66/15

15/3

0.15

0.10

0.02

0.07

0.05

0.01

0.08

0.06

0.01

0.0

0.0

0.0

1 Acute endangered species concerns (> 0.1) 

Mammalian chronic risk quotients for application of fluazinam and are based on a rat 

(Rattus norvegicus) NOAEC of 100 ppm. 

Crop

Application 

Rate lbs ai/A ( # 

of applications)

Food Items Max.

EEC

(ppm)

Chronic RQ

(Max. EEC/NOAEC)

Legumes 0.44 

(2/7)

Short Grass

Tall Grass

Broadleaf plant/ 

Insects

Seeds

197

111

90

12

1.97

1.11

0.90

0.12

Ginseng 0.52 

(6/7)

Short Grass

Tall Grass

Broadleaf plant/ 

Insects

Seeds

544

306

249

34

5.44

3.06

2.49

0.34

Ginseng 0.78 

(4/7)

Short Grass

Tall Grass

Broadleaf plant/ 

Insects

Seeds

615

346

282

38

6.15

3.46

2.82

0.38

Bushberry 0.65 

(6/7)

Short Grass

Tall Grass

Broadleaf plant/ 

Insects

Seeds

680

383

312

42

6.80

3.83

3.12

0.42

1 Chronic concern (> 1.0)
10

10

B. Risk Description 

The risk hypothesis states that the use of fluazinam for various crops may expose terrestrial and 

aquatic animals and plants resulting in adverse effects. Based on available ecotoxicity data and 

predicted environmental exposures, this ecological risk assessment does support the presumption 

of risk to terrestrial and aquatic organisms. Acute LOCs were exceeded for mammals and chronic 

LOCs were exceeded for both bird and mammal species. In addition, acute LOCs were exceeded 

for aquatic organisms (freshwater fish, estuarine invertebrates and estuarine benthic organisms). 

Chronic LOCs were exceeded for freshwater fish, estuarine invertebrates and estuarine benthic 

organisms. 

Available data suggest that fluazinam and its transformation products are moderately persistent, 

should not leach substantially to ground water but may present concerns for transport to surface 

water by spray drift or runoff (especially in soils with low organic content).

Birds and Mammals

Fluazinam is practically nontoxic to birds on an acute dietary exposure basis. The concentrations 

at which acute effects may be observed for birds is unknown, but is greater than 10,500 ppm. Thus 

no acute avian RQs could be calculated. However, chronic LOCs were exceeded for avian (RQs 

ranged from 0.06 to 3.40) and mammalian (RQs ranged from 0.12 to 6.80) endangered and 

non-endangered species. In addition, there are acute risks to endangered mammals that eat 

shortgrass as the main part of their diet.

Aquatic Species

RQs exceeded the endangered and non-endangered acute and chronic LOCs for freshwater fish,

estuarine invertebrates and for estuarine benthic organisms under the current use patterns. In

addition, acute risk was indicated for endangered estuarine fish and freshwater invertebrates. The 

following table lists RQs for aquatic species:

Species Acute RQs Chronic RQs

Freshwater Fish 0.06 to 0.22 3.38 to 6.93

Freshwater Invertebrates 0.05 to 0.09 No Risk

Freshwater Benthic Organisms No Risk No Risk

Estuarine Fish 0.05 to 0.14 No Risk

Estuarine Invertebrates 0.45 to 3.59 2.01 to 3.36

Estuarine Benthic Organisms 0.11 to 1.03 1.24 to 2.42

Insects

Currently, EFED does not assess risk to insects. Results of acceptable studies are used for 

recommending appropriate label precautions. Since fluazinam is practically nontoxic to honey

bees, no labeling precautions are required and low risk is assumed.
11

11

Plants

Terrestrial Plants: No hazard to terrestrial plant species is expected, based on the results of 

acceptable studies submitted.

Aquatic Plants: An analysis of the results indicates that the plant acute risk LOC is not exceeded. 

No risk is presumed for nonvascular aquatic plants from use of fluazinam using the valid data 

available. However, some of the submitted plant studies were deemed invalid and should be 

repeated to more accurately characterize risk to aquatic plants. Currently, EFED does not assess 

chronic risk to aquatic plants.

Endocrine Disruption

EPA is required under the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), as amended by FQPA, 

to develop a screening program to determine whether certain substances (including all pesticide 

active and other ingredients) “may have an effect in humans that is similar to an effect produced by

a naturally-occurring estrogen, or other such endocrine effects as the Administrator may

designate.” Following the recommendations of its Endocrine Disruptor Screening and Testing 

Advisory Committee (EDSTAC), EPA determined that there was scientific basis for including, as 

part of the program, the androgen- and thyroid hormone systems, in addition to the estrogen 

hormone system. EPA also adopted EDSTAC’s recommendation that the Program include 

evaluations of potential effects in wildlife. For pesticide chemicals, EPA will use FIFRA and, to 

the extent that effects in wildlife may help determine whether a substance may have an effect in 

humans, FFDCA authority to require the wildlife evaluations. As the science develops and 

resources allow, screening of additional hormone systems may be added to the Endocrine 

Disruptor Screening Program (EDSP). When the appropriate screening and or testing protocols 

being considered under the Agency’s Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program have been 

developed, fluazinam may be subjected to additional screening and or testing to better characterize 

effects related to endocrine disruption. Issues that have raised this concern include avian 

reproductive effects (reduction in 14-day old survivor weight), mammalian reproduction effects 

(decreased number of implantation sites and decreased litter sizes), and fish reproduction effects 

(number of spawns per female and per cent hatch).

Incident Characterization

There were no adverse ecological incidents found in the EFED database.

Endangered Species Assessment

The following section discusses the screening-level assessment for Federally listed threatened and 

endangered species. Endangered and non-endangered species RQs exceeded acute mammalian 

and chronic avian and mammalian LOCs. 

For the crop scenarios used to evaluate risk to aquatic organisms, the LOC (0.05) for acute effects 

to listed species of freshwater and estuarine/marine fish and invertebrates were exceeded. Since 

there were risks to fish, risk to listed amphibians is also predicted. Chronic LOCs were also 

exceeded for freshwater fish and estuarine invertebrates as well as for estuarine benthic organisms.
12

12

Listed Species

The endangered species chronic LOC was exceeded for bird and mammal species. In addition, 

endangered amphibians, reptiles, fish and invertebrates may also be affected should exposure 

actually occur.

a. Action Area

The Endangered Species Act defines the action area for a Federal action as being the footprint of 

possible effects stemming from the action, not necessarily limited to where the immediate action 

occurs. For screening-level purposes, the risk assessment conservatively assumes that listed 

species are co-located with the pesticide treatment area. This means that terrestrial plants and 

wildlife are assumed to be located on or adjacent to the treated field and aquatic organisms are 

assumed to be located in a surface water body adjacent to the treated field. This assumption places 

the listed species within an assumed area of high potential exposure to the pesticide. 

If the assumptions associated with the screening-level action area result in RQs that are below the 

listed species LOCs, a "no effect" determination conclusion is made with respect to listed species 

in that taxa, and no further refinement of the action area is necessary. Furthermore, RQs below the 

listed species LOCs for a given taxonomic group indicate no concern for indirect effects upon 

listed species that depend upon the taxonomic group covered by the RQ as a resource. However, 

in situations where the screening assumptions lead to RQs in excess of the listed species LOCs for 

a given taxonomic group, there exists a potential for a "may affect" conclusion exists and may be 

associated with direct effects on listed species belonging to that taxonomic group or may extend to 

indirect effects upon listed species that depend upon that taxonomic group as a resource. In such 

cases, additional information on the biology of listed species, the locations of these species, and the 

locations of use sites could be considered to determine the extent to which screening assumptions 

regarding an action area apply to a particular listed species. These subsequent refinement steps 

could consider how this information would impact the action area for a particular listed organism 

and may potentially include areas of exposure that are downwind and downstream of the pesticide 

use site.

b. Taxonomic Groups Potentially at Risk

The endangered species acute LOC was exceeded for mammals and chronic LOCs were exceeded 

for both bird and mammal species. In addition, acute endangered species LOCs were exceeded for 

aquatic organisms (freshwater fish and invertebrates, estuarine fish and invertebrates and estuarine 

benthic organisms). Chronic LOCs were exceeded for freshwater fish, estuarine invertebrates and 

estuarine benthic organisms. 

c. Indirect Effects Analysis

The Agency acknowledges that pesticides have the potential to exert indirect effects upon the listed 

organisms by perturbing forage or prey availability, altering the extent of nesting habitat, creating 

gaps in the food chain, etc. In conducting a screen for indirect effects, direct effect LOCs for each 

taxonomic group are used to make inferences concerning the potential for indirect effects upon 

listed species that rely upon non-endangered organisms in these taxonomic groups as resources 

critical to their life cycle.
13

13

When screening-level acute RQs exceed the endangered species acute LOCs, the Agency uses the 

dose response relationship from the toxicity study used for calculating the RQ to estimate the 

probability of acute effects associated with an exposure equivalent to the EEC (see Probit Analysis 

below). This information serves as a guide to establish the need for and extent of additional 

analysis that may be performed using Services-provided “species profiles” as well as evaluations 

of the geographical and temporal nature of the exposure to ascertain if a “not likely to adversely

affect” determination can be made. The degree to which additional analyses are performed is 

commensurate with the predicted probability of adverse effects from the comparison of the dose 

response information with the EECs. The greater the probability that exposures will produce 

effects on a taxa, the greater the concern for potential indirect effects for listed species dependent 

upon that taxa, and therefore, the more intensive the analysis on the potential listed species of 

concern, their locations relative to the use site, and information regarding the use scenario (e.g., 

timing, frequency, and geographical extent of pesticide application).

Birds and Mammals

Screening-level RQs that exceed the LOC may indicate a potential concern for indirect effects. The 

Agency considers this to be indicative of a potential for adverse effects to those listed species that 

rely either on a specific species (species obligate) or multiple species (dependent) for some 

important aspect of their life cycles. The Agency may determine if listed organisms for which 

these species are a critical component of their resource needs are within the pesticide use area. 

This is accomplished through a comparison of Service-provided “species profiles” and listed 

species location data. If no listed organisms that are either species obligates or dependent reside 

within the pesticide use area, a no effect determination on listed species is made. If species 

obligate or dependent organisms may reside within the pesticide use area, the Agency may

consider temporal and geographical nature of exposure, and the scope of the effects data, to 

determine if any potential effects can be determined to not likely adversely affect a species obligate 

or dependent listed organism.

Indirect effects to terrestrial animals may result from reduced food items to animals, behavior 

modifications from reduced or a modified habitat, and from alterations of habitats. Alterations of 

habitats can affect the reproductive capacity of some terrestrial animals.

Probit Slope Analysis

The probit slope response relationship is evaluated to calculate the chance of an individual event 

corresponding to the listed species acute LOCs. If information is unavailable to estimate a slope 

for a particular study, a default slope assumption of 4.5 is used as per original Agency assumptions 

of typical slope cited in Urban and Cook (1986). 

a. Terrestrial Species

Terrestrial acute toxicity studies for fluazinam were deemed practically non-toxic to slightly toxic 

on an acute oral basis and provided estimates of slopes. Analysis of raw data from these acute 

toxicity studies provided slopes of 5.25 for birds and a default slope of 4.5 for mammals. Based 

on these slopes, the corresponding estimate chance of individual mortality following exposure is 
14

14

1 in 1.31 x 107for birds and 1 in 2.94 x 105for mammals.

b. Aquatic Species

Acute toxicity studies for fluazinam did provide raw data and estimates of slopes for fish and 

invertebrate species. Analysis of raw data from the aquatic acute toxicity studies provided slopes 

of 10.43 for freshwater fish, 2.99 for freshwater invertebrates and 7.77 for estuarine/marine 

invertebrates and a default value of 4.5 for estuarine/marine fish. Based on these slopes, the 

corresponding estimate chance of individual mortality following exposure is 1 in 3.30 x 1041 for 

freshwater fish, 1 in 2.00 x 104for freshwater invertebrates, 1 in 3.97 x 1023 for estuarine/marine 

invertebrates and 1 in 4.18 x 108for estuarine/marine fish.

c. Critical Habitat

In the evaluation of pesticide effects on designated critical habitat, consideration is given to the 

physical and biological features (constituent elements) of a critical habitat identified by the U.S 

Fish and Wildlife and National Marine Fisheries Services as essential to the conservation of a 

listed species and which may require special management considerations or protection. The 

evaluation of impacts for a screening-level pesticide risk assessment focuses on the biological 

features that are constituent elements and is accomplished using the screening-level taxonomic 

analysis (risk quotients, RQs) and listed species levels of concern (LOCs) that are used to evaluate 

direct and indirect effects to listed organisms.

When there is potential for indirect effects, the next step for EPA and the Service(s) would be to 

identify which listed species and critical habitat are potentially implicated. Analytically, the 

identification of such species and critical habitat can occur in either of two ways. First, the 

agencies could determine whether the action area overlaps critical habitat or the occupied range of 

any listed species. If so, EPA would examine whether the pesticide's potential impacts on 

non-endangered species would affect the listed species indirectly or directly affect a constituent 

element of the critical habitat. Alternatively, the agencies could determine which listed species 

depend on biological resources, or have constituent elements that fall into, the taxa that may be 

directly or indirectly impacted by the pesticide. Then EPA would determine whether use of the 

pesticide overlaps the critical habitat or the occupied range of those listed species. At present, the 

information reviewed by EPA does not permit use of either analytical approach to make a 

definitive identification of species that are potentially impacted indirectly or critical habitats that is 

potentially impacted directly by the use of the pesticide. EPA and the Service(s) are working 

together to conduct the necessary analysis.

If potential risk was found, the screening-level risk assessment for critical habitat would provide 

a listing of potential biological features that, if they are constituent elements of one or more critical 

habitats, would be of potential concern. These correspond to the taxa identified above as being of 

potential concern for indirect effects and include all taxa that depend on invertebrates for survival. 

This list would serve as an initial step in problem formulation for further assessment of critical 

habitat impacts outlined above, should additional work be necessary. 
15

15

V. APPENDICES

Appendix A. Data Requirement Tables for Fluazinam 

Data Requirement Use

Pattern1

Does EPA Have

Data To Satisfy

This Requirement?

(Yes, No, or Partially)

Bibliographic

Citation 

Must Additional

Data Be Submitted

Under FIFRA 

3(c)(2)(B)?

§158.490 WILDLIFE AND AQUATIC ORGANISMS

71-1(a) Acute Avian Oral, Quail/Duck 1,2 Yes 42248623, 42248622 No

71-2(a) Acute Avian Diet, Quail 1,2 Yes 42248624 No

71-2(b) Acute Avian Diet, Duck 1,2 Yes 4228625 No

71-3 Wild Mammal Toxicity 1,2 NA

71-4(a) Avian Reproduction Quail 1,2 Yes 44807323 No

71-4(b) Avian Reproduction Duck 1,2 Yes 44831907 No

71-5(a) Simulated Terrestrial Field Study 1,2 NA

71-5(b) Actual Terrestrial Field Study 1,2 NA

72-1(a) Acute Fish Toxicity Bluegill 1,2 Yes 42974905 No

72-1(b) Acute Fish Toxicity (TEP) 1,2 No NA No

72-1(c) Acute Fish Toxicity Rainbow Trout 1,2 Yes 42974904, 42208409 No

72-1(d) Acute Fish Toxicity Rainbow Trout (TEP) 1,2 No NA No

72-2(a) Acute Aquatic Invertebrate 1,2 Yes 42974906, 42208410 No

72-2(b) Acute Aquatic Invertebrate (TEP) 1,2 No NA No

72-3(a) Acute Est/Mar Toxicity Fish 1,2 Yes

Yes

44807325

45822102

No

No

72-3(b) Acute Est/Mar Toxicity Mollusk 1,2 Yes 44807324 No

72-3(c) Acute Est/Mar Toxicity Shrimp 1,2 Yes 44807326 No

72-3(d) Acute Est/Mar Toxicity Fish (TEP) 1,2 No NA No

72-3(e) Acute Est/Mar Toxicity Mollusk (TEP) 1,2 No NA No

72-3(f) Acute Est/Mar Toxicity Shrimp (TEP) 1,2 No NA No

72-4(a) Early Life Stage Fish 1,2 Yes 44807327 No

72-4(b) Life Cycle Aquatic Invertebrate 1,2 Yes

Yes

4807328

45822101

No

No

72-5 Life Cycle Fish 1,2 Yes 44807329 No

72-6 Aquatic Organism Accumulation 1,2 No NA No

72-7(1) Simulated Aquatic Field Study 1,2 No NA No

72-7(b) Actual Aquatic Field Study 1,2 No NA No
16

16

Data Requirement Use

Pattern1

Does EPA Have

Data To Satisfy

This Requirement?

(Yes, No, or Partially)

Bibliographic

Citation 

Must Additional

Data Be Submitted

Under FIFRA 

3(c)(2)(B)?

§158.540 PLANT PROTECTION

122-1(a) Seed Germ,Seedling Enmergence 1,2 No

No

44807331

46172801

Yes

Yes4

122-2 Aquatic Plant Growth 1,2 No NA Yes4

122-1(b) Vegetative Vigor 1,2 No

Yes

44807332

46172802

Yes

No 

123-1(a) Seed Germ./Seedling Emerg. 1,2 No NA Yes

123-1(b) Vegetative Vigor 1,2 No 44807333 Yes

123-2 Aquatic Plant Growth 1,2 No

No

No

No

Yes

No

44807334

45822103

45822104

45822105

45822106

45822107

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

124-1 Terrestrial Field Study 1,2 No NA No

124-2 Aquatic Field Study 1,2 No NA No

§158.490 NONTARGET INSECT TESTING

141-1 Honey Bee Acute Contact 1,2 Yes 42208411 No

141-2 Honey Bee Residue on Foliage 1,2 No NA No

141-5 Fueld Test for Pollinators 1,2 NA

§158.290 ENVIRONMENTAL FATE

Degradation Studies-Lab:

161-1 Hydrolysis 1,2 Yes 42208412 No

161-2 Photodegradation In Water 1,2 Yes 44807312, 43521009 Yes

161-3 Photodegradation On Soil 1,2 Yes 42208413 No

Metabolism Studies-Lab:

162-1 Aerobic Soil 1,2 Yes 42208413 No

162-2 Anaerobic Soil 1,2 No NA No

Mobility Studies:

163-1 Leaching- Adsorption/Desorp. 1,2 Yes 44807314 No

163-2 Volatility (Lab) 1,2 No NA No

Dissipation Studies-Field:
17

17

Data Requirement Use

Pattern1

Does EPA Have

Data To Satisfy

This Requirement?

(Yes, No, or Partially)

Bibliographic

Citation 

Must Additional

Data Be Submitted

Under FIFRA 

3(c)(2)(B)?

164-1 Soil 1,2 Yes 44807318, 44807320, 

44807316, 44807319, 

44807317

Yes

Accumulation Studies:

165-4 In Fish 1,2 Yes 43521012 No

Ground Water Monitoring Studies:

166-1 Small-Scale Prospective 1,2 No NA Reserved

§158.440 SPRAY DRIFT

201-1 Droplet Size Spectrum

202-1 Drift Field Evaluation

1. Composition: TGAI=Technical grade of the active ingredient; PAIRA=Pure active ingredient, radiolabeled; TEP=Typical end-use product

2. Use Patterns:1=Terrestrial/Food; 2=Terrestrial/Feed; 3=Terrestrial Non-Food; 4=Aquatic Food; 5=Aquatic Non-Food (Outdoor); 

6=Aquatic Non-Food (Industrial); 7=Aquatic Non-Food (Residential); 8=Greenhouse Food; 9=Greenhouse Non-Food; 10=Forestry; 11=Residential 

Outdoor; 12=Indoor Food; 13=Indoor Non-Food; 14=Indoor Medical; 15=Indoor Residential

3. This guideline requirement has been fulfilled for freshwater fish and invertebrates but has not been fulfilled for estuarine/marine fish or 

invertebrates.

4. Guideline study is recommended.

5. Requirement is pending results of Tier I testing or may be submitted in lieu of Tier I testing at Tier II level.
18

18

Appendix B. Structures of Fluazinam

Fluazinam:

AMPA:

N

H

N

O2N

H2N

Cl

CF3

Cl

F3C

CAPA:

N

H

N

O2N

O2N

Cl

CF3

Cl

HOOC

DAPA:
19

19

N

H

N

H2N

CF3

Cl

H2N

Cl

F3C

DAPA

DCPA:

N

H

N

O2N

COOH

Cl

O2N

Cl

HOOC

DCPA

MAPA:

N

H

N

H2N

O2N

Cl

CF3

Cl

F3C
20

20

Appendix C: PRZM/EXAMS Output Data and Equilibrium Partitioning

Background Information on PRZM/EXAMS: 

The Tier II aquatic model employs PRZM (Pesticide Root Zone Model; version 3.12 Beta 

compiled May 24, 2001) and EXAMS (Exposure Analysis Modeling System; version 2.98.04, 

compiled November 12, 2002). PRZM simulates processes such like runoff and erosion from an 

agricultural field on a daily time step. The runoff and erosion flux output data from PRZM are 

used as chemical loadings to the EXAMS surface water program in order to predict the EECs. A 

graphical user interface (pe4v01.pl) developed by the EPA (http://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/

models/water) was used to facilitate inputting chemical and use specific parameters into the 

appropriate PRZM input files (inp) and EXAMS chemical files. Five PRZM field (crop) scenarios 

were modeled: OR snapbeans, FL cabbage, MI bean, OR berry and MN sugarbeet (surrogate for 

ginseng). An effort was made to cover all the new crops. In the absence of a standard berries 

scenario, an OP’s scenario was utilized (OR berries). The scenario is suitable for characterization 

purposes. In the absence of a ginseng scenario, a surrogate scenario was utilized, the MN 

sugarbeet was considered similar to ginseng; in addition, it is located in a state where ginseng is 

grown. The scenario utilized to represent brassica was FL cabbage, it was considered the most 

appropriate and similar in characteristics. This scenario had the particularity that the modeling 

required soil incorporation.

PRZM is a one-dimensional, dynamic, compartmental model that can be used to simulate chemical 

movement in unsaturated soil systems within and immediately below the plant root zone. It has 

two major components: hydrology (and hydraulics) and chemical transport. The hydrologic 

component for calculating runoff and erosion is based on the Soil Conservation Service curve 

number technique and the Universal Soil Loss Equation. Evapotranspiration is estimated either 

directly from pan evaporation data, or based on an empirical formula. Water movement is 

simulated by the use of generalized soil parameters, including field capacity, wilting point, and 

saturation water content. 

The chemical transport component can simulate pesticides or other chemicals. For pesticides, the 

transport component can simulate pesticide application on the soil or on the plant foliage. 

Biodegradation can also be considered in the root zone. Dissolved, adsorbed, and vapor-phase 

concentrations in the soil are estimated by simultaneously considering the processes of pesticide 

uptake by plants, surface runoff, erosion, decay, volatilization, foliar washoff, advection, 

dispersion, and retardation. For nitrogen, simulation of surface applications, atmospheric 

deposition, and septic effluent discharge may all be simulated.

EXAMS is a model that has a set of process modules that link fundamental chemical properties to 

limnological processes that control the kinetics and transport of chemicals in aquatic systems. It 

provides facilities for steady state or long-term evaluation of chronic chemical discharges, 

initial-value approaches for studying short-term contaminant releases, and full kinetic simulations 

that allow for monthly variation in mean climatological factors, and changes in contaminant 

loadings on daily time scales. It is fairly and relatively complex model that requires more input 
21

21

variables, ranging from hydro-geological and weather data to pesticide physicochemical properties, 

mobility coefficients, and degradation rate constants in the aqueous and sediment phases. EXAMS 

provides 20 output tables that document the input data sets and provide integrated results 

summaries for aid in ecological risk assessments.

Screening Level RQ values (Sediment)

Contamination of sediments is a widespread ecological problem that can pose a potential 

risk to a wide variety of aquatic organisms and aquatic ecosystems. All aquatic life has some 

contact either direct or indirect with sediments as a media for habitat and or a source of food. This 

is an ecologically important habitat where significant densities and diversities of benthic and 

epibenthic species occur. Embryonic life stages and gametes of infaunal, epibenthic and water 

column species of a variety of commercially important fisheries can also be found directly in 

contact with sediments (e.g., salmon, trout, clams, oysters) during critical stages of their 

development. A wide host of fish and aquatic invertebrates live in or on the benthos in direct or 

close proximity of sediments. Because of the widely accepted recognition that sediments serve as 

a dynamic media for aquatic ecosystems, government organizations, as well as industry have come 

to realize that sediments can act as a repository for many contaminants, especially those that are 

lipophilic. This recognition of the potential for problem is manifest through examples of 

deleterious effects from contaminated sediments and their significant impact on commercial 

fisheries (e.g., TBT and effects to shell fish), ecosystem diversity (e.g., TBT and endocrine effects 

to mollusks), and possible impact to endangered species (e.g., salmonides in the Pacific 

Northwest). State and federal regulatory agencies currently rely on several assessment tools in 

order to evaluate the toxic effects of contaminated sediments on marine and freshwater 

communities that include measures of chemical concentration, bioaccumulation, and biological 

toxicity test. The combination of defining exposure and effects can provide a first step for an 

integrative approach to defining sediment quality and the potential for risk to ecosystems and 

populations. Sediment toxicity tests are considered to be a powerful assessment tool that help to 

define the potential for acute and chronic risk to aquatic systems from contaminated sediment 

exposure. The use of sediment testing and sediment evaluation can often complete the risk picture 

for many compounds that are present in the water column for a relatively short time. Sediment test 

can facilitate the use of relatively sensitive life stages (e.g., 2nd and third instar for chironomus) in 

addressing toxicity from this media. Acute sediment test can measure effects that include survival, 

growth and emergence, while chronic studies can add important information on reproduction. 

The risk quotients (RQ) for sediment dwelling organisms were estimated with an 

extrapolation method recommended by the USEPA Office of Water (OW). This was based on the 

Agency’s Equilibrium Partitioning Sediment Guidelines (ESG) under the Clean Water Act [CWA 

Section 304(a)(2)]. Often EFED is faced with the problem of assessing risk to aquatic systems 

from compounds that readily bind to particulate and eventually accumulate in the sediment. This 

issue is more problematic if sediment toxicity date and/or monitoring information are also not 

available. Therefore, in order to address this concern, EFED has consulted with the OW, and

adopted a method for extrapolating exposure values (i.e., bulk sediment and porewater) that relies 

on the equilibrium partitioning (EqP) of nonionic compounds in sediment. The EqP theory holds 

that a nonionic chemical in sediment partitions between sediment organic carbon, interstitial (pore) 

water and benthic organisms. At equilibrium, if the concentration in any phase is known, then the 

concentration in the other phases can be predicted through the organic/carbon soil partition 

coefficient (KOC). In order to generate exposure concentrations from sediment (ug/kgoc ) and 

porewater (ug/L) for calculating RQs, EFED relies on the output from the PRZM/ EXAMS model. 

The effects components, are standard water column toxicity endpoints (e.g., worst case LC50, 

NOAEC). This extrapolation method is useful for estimating potential sediment exposure values, 

as well as sediment toxicity values that can be used in a screening level risk assessment. 
22

22

Rationale for EqP Use in EFED Assessing Risk to Sediment Organisms:

Fluazinam residues are lipophilic compounds with relatively high KOC values that can 

adsorb readily to particulate and sediment with resulting exposure to benthic aquatic life through 

respiration, ingestion, dermal contact, as well as indirect impact to other species through food 

chain alterations. Since, sediment can act as a reservoir for these compounds, the bioavailability to 

aquatic organisms living in this medium is a concern that EFED is trying to address through 

consultation with the EPA Office of Water (OW).

Under the Clean Water Act (CWA Section 304(a)(2) the Environmental Protection Agency

(EPA) and the States are expected to develop programs for protecting the chemical, physical, and 

biological integrity of the nation’s waters. In order to meet the objectives of the CWA, EPA’s 

Office of water (OW) has periodically issued ambient water quality criteria (WQC). However, 

toxic contaminants in bottom sediments of lakes, rivers, wetlands, and coastal waters can also 

create potential for environmental degradation even if water column contamination values are low 

and comply with the Agency’s water quality criteria. In order to evaluate this possible concern the 

OW also calculates Equilibrium Partitioning Sediment Guidelines (ESG). 

Pesticide compounds that bind readily to particulate and organic carbon may have a limited 

exposure to aquatic organisms in the water column. However, this increase in particulate-boundpesticides can result in an accumulation of compounds in or on the sediment that may have the 

potential for toxic impact to benthic and epibenthic aquatic organisms (e.g., early life stage of 

many invertebrates and fish, as well as crabs and shrimp). However, evaluating the risk to aquatic 

life from this exposure becomes problematic especially if there is a lack of adequate sediment 

toxicity and exposure data. Therefore, in order to assess this potential for pesticide risk to aquatic 

benthic systems, the Environmental Fate and Effects Division (EFED) of the Office of Pesticides 

Program (OPP) has adopted the method used by the OW that relies on the theory of equilibrium 

partitioning (EqP) of chemicals. This theory is based on the hydrophobicity and concentrations of 

the chemical normalized to organic carbon (OC) in sediment (De Toro et al. 1991) and holds that 

a nonionic chemical in sediment partitions between sediment organic carbon, interstitial (pore) 

water and benthic organisms. At equilibrium, if the concentration in any phase is known, then the 

concentration in the other phases can be predicted. A key component to this theory is the chemicals 

organic carbon coefficient (Koc), which is constant for every chemical and represents the ratio of 

the chemical concentration in water to the concentration in organic carbon. The document, 

“Technical Basis for the Derivation of Equilibrium Partitioning Sediment Guidelines (ESGs) for 

the Protection of Benthic Organisms: Nonionic Organics” (USEPA, 2000), demonstrates that 

biological responses of benthic organisms to nonionic organic chemicals in sediments are different 

when the sediment concentrations are expressed on a dry weight basis, but similar when expressed 

on a ug chemical/g organic carbon basis (ug/goc). Similar responses were also observed across 

sediments when interstitial water concentrations were used to normalize biological availability. 

The Technical Basis Document further demonstrates that if the toxic effect concentration in water 

is known (e.g., LC50), the effect concentration in sediment on a ug/goc basis can be predicted by

multiplying the effect concentration in water by the chemical Koc.

 (LC50 ug/L x Koc L/kgoc x 1 kgoc/1000goc = LC50 ug/goc)

Since, EFED uses a deterministic method for its screening level risk assessment, the 

calculation of risk quotient values (RQ) is important for assessing possible risk. The RQ values are 

calculated by taking the ratio of the estimated exposure concentrations (EEC) to the toxicity effect 

value (e.g., LC50, NOAEC). The EEC values are model generated (e.g., GENEEC, PRZM/ 

EXAMS) and reflect peer evaluated and approved scenarios for assessing pesticide exposure to an 

aquatic environment. However, the PRZM/ EXAMS output produces water column EEC values, 

as well as sediment and porewater EEC values. Therefore, in order to assess possible toxic
23

23

pesticide exposure to aquatic organisms from sediments, EFED is using the PRZM/EXAMS 

model which incorporates the principles of the equilibrium partitioning theory, in order to generate 

EECs from sediment and porewater. By relying on sediment and/or porewater output values, 

EFED has two ways for calculating RQ values for sediments by using porewater exposure values 

and bulk sediment values. RQ values can be produced by using the PRZM/EXAMS EEC output 

value for sediment as follows: 

EEC sediment ug/ugoc / LC50 ug/goc

The calculations that rely on porewater can be calculated by dividing the PRZM/ EXAMS output 

value for porewater concentrations by the dissolved concentrations in the water column that caused 

toxicity in bioassays (e.g., LC50).

 EEC porewater ug/L / LC50 ugL

Assumptions of the equilibrium partitioning model

Three principal observations that underlie the equilibrium partitioning (EqP) approach:

 The concentrations of nonionic organic chemicals in sediments (expressed on an organic carbon basis) and in 

interstitial waters correlate with observed biological effects on sediment-dwelling organisms across a range 

of sediments. 

 Partitioning models can relate sediment concentrations for nonionic organic chemicals on an organic carbon 

basis to freely-dissolved concentrations in interstitial water.

 The distribution of sensitivities of benthic organisms is similar to that of water column species.

The EqP approach assumes that the partitioning of a chemical between sediment organic carbon 

and interstitial water is at or near equilibrium. Another assumption is that the concentration in 

either phase can be predictive using appropriate partition coefficient and the measured 

concentration in the other phase. Furthermore, it is assumed that organisms receive equivalent 

exposure from water-only exposures or from any equilibrated phase (interstitial water via 

respiration; from sediment via ingestion or other sediment integument exchange). The final 

assumption is that for nonionic compounds, effect concentrations in sediments on an organic 

carbon basis can be predicted using the organic carbon partition coefficient (Koc) and effects 

concentrations in the water.

This method to estimate the risk to sediment dwelling organisms have certain uncertainties. 

First, it appears that the exposure may be underestimated because it assumes that the only source 

of contact of fluazinam residues to the sediment dwellers is the pore water; however, these 

organisms may be in constant contact with the sediments and even feed from them or from other 

small organisms that are contaminated. Second, the sensitivity of the sediment dwellers towards 

fluazinam residues is assumed to be similar to that of water column dwellers in the absence of data, 

adding uncertainty to the calculation. Finally, some organisms dwell in the sediment only partially, 

(e.g. tadpoles) and the risk is very uncertain in those cases.
24

24

Input Parameters Utilized in PRZM/EXAMS for Fluazinam:

Parameter (units) Value(s) Sources Comments

Output File Name fluazina --- ---

Chemical Name Fluazinam Label Omega 500F label (EPA Reg. No. 

71512-1).

Crop Name OR snap bean 

FL cabbage

MI bean

OR berries

MN sugarbeets (for ginseng)

Label Omega 500F label (EPA Reg. No. 

71512-1)

Application Rate (Kg a.i./ha)

ORsnapbean 0.493

FLcabbage 2.242

MIbean 0.493

ORberry 0.729

MNsugarbeet 0.874

Label Omega 500F label (EPA Reg. No. 

71512-1). Label application rate:

ORsnapbean 0.44 lb a.i./A

FLcabbage 2.00 lb a.i./A

MIbean 0.44 lb a.i./A

ORberry 0.65 lb a.i./A

MNsugarbeet 0.78 lb a.i./A

Day of Application (day-month)/ 

pre-harvest interval ORsnapbean 31-07

FLcabbage 22-12

MIbean 17-07

ORberry 14-05

MNsugarbeet 08-08

Label PHI:

ORsnapbean 14

FLcabbage 50

MIbean 30

ORberry 30

MNsugarbeet 30

Estimated from metadata file and 

proposed labels.

Number of Applications Allowed ORsnapbean 2

FLcabbage 1

MIbean 2

ORberry 6

MNsugarbeet 4

Label Omega 500F label (EPA Reg. No. 

71512-1).

Interval between Applications 

(days)

ORsnapbean 7

FLcabbage N/A

MIbean 7

ORberry 7

MNsugarbeet 7

Label Omega 500F label (EPA Reg. No. 

71512-1).

CAM (Chemical application 

method) ORsnapbean 2

FLcabbage 4

MIbean 2

ORberry 2

MNsugarbeet 2

Label Omega 500F label (EPA Reg. No. 

71512-1). 2=linear foliar based on 

crop canopy for all crops except FL 

cabbage; 4=soil applied, user 

defined incorporation depth, 

uniform with depth for FL cabbage

IPSCND (Flag indicating the 

disposition of pesticide remaining 

on foliage after harvest)

ORsnapbean 1

FLcabbage N/A

MIbean 1

ORberry 1

MNsugarbeet 1

1, pesticide remaining on foliage is 

converted to surface application to 

the top soil layer

DEPI = Incorporation Depth 0.0 in for all crops, except 

FLcabbage (15.2 cm)

Label Omega 500F label (EPA Reg. No. 

71512-1).

KOC 1957.5 MRID: 42248628, 

42974913, 46235732

Represents the average KOC value 

among four values ranging from 

1705 to 2316 ml/g; the KOC model 

was utilized because it represents 

better the mobility of fluazinam.

Aerobic Soil Metabolism (days) 396 MRID: 42208413 3X the available value, to account 

for the uncertainty in the availability 

of only one value.

Method of Application Ground for all crops, except 

FLcabbage (soil incorporated)

Label Omega 500F label (EPA Reg. No. 

71512-1).

Buffer Zone (ft.) N/A Label Omega 500F label (EPA Reg. No. 

71512-1).
25

25

Input Parameters Utilized in PRZM/EXAMS for Fluazinam:

Parameter (units) Value(s) Sources Comments

Application Efficiency (fraction) 0.99 for ground application

1.00 for FLcabbage

--- EFED guidance on input parameters 

for PRZM/EXAMS dated 2/28/02

Spray Drift (fraction) 0.02 for ground application

0.00 for FLcabbage

--- EFED guidance on input parameters 

for PRZM/EXAMS dated 2/28/02

Solubility in Water (ppm) 0.71 MRID: 42208403 10X the actual solubility as per 

EFED guidance on input parameters 

for PRZM/EXAMS.

Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism 

(days)

91.7 MRID: 44807314 Represents the 90th percentile of the 

upper confidence bound on the 

mean of two half-life values: 51 and 

71 days; mean = 61 days; std. dev. 

= 14.1 days. These values 

correspond to the total residues, not 

to the parent fluazinam.

Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism 

(days)

0 MRID: 43521010 Fluazinam and its transformation 

products are nearly stable as a whole 

in anaerobic aquatic environment.

Hydrolysis at pH 7 half-life (days) 42 MRID: 42208412 ---

Aqueous Photolysis @ pH 7 (days) 2.5 MRID: 44807312, 

43521009

---

Molecular Weight (g/mole) 465.1 PMRA Regulatory Note 

REG2003-12, 10/27/03

Vapor Pressure (torr or mmHg) 8.25 x 10-6 MRID: 42248403

Henry’s Law Constant

(atm-m

3

/mol)

6.73 x 10-7PMRA Regulatory Note 

REG2003-12, 10/27/03

Environment pond298.exv --- Default for pond scenario, as 

Field Size Pond --- opposed to index reservoir.

Runoff none --- ---

PRZM Scenario ORsnbeansC.txt

FLcabbageC.txt

MIbeansC.txt

ORberriesOP.txt

MNsugarbeetC.txt

--- It is noted that the OR berries 

scenario was created for 

organo-phosphates; however, it is 

useful for characterization of other 

chemicals as well.

Metfile Scenario w24232.dvf

w12842.dvf

w14826.dvf

w24232.dvf

w14914.dvf

--- As indicated by the shell (pe4).

FEXTRC, Foliar extraction 0.5 EFED guidance on input parameters 

for PRZM/EXAMS dated 2/28/02

PLDKRT, Decay rate on foliage 0 EFED guidance on input parameters 

for PRZM/EXAMS dated 2/28/02

PLVKRT, Volatilization rate from 

foliage

0 EFED guidance on input parameters 

for PRZM/EXAMS dated 2/28/02

UPTKF, Uptake factor 0 EFED guidance on input parameters 

for PRZM/EXAMS dated 2/28/02

Write Benthic Pore Water 

Concentrations?

Yes --- Necessary to calculate the benthic 

risk quotients.
26

26

Estimated environmental concentrations of fluazinam (ppb) in the water column and benthic pore 

water.

Crop Scenario Media Peak 21-day 60-day

FL cabbage soil 

incorporated a

*2.00 (1) 2.00

Water Column 2.10 1.28 0.84

Benthic Pore Water 0.557 0.553 0.538

MI bean ground a

*0.44 (2) 0.88

Water Column 9.30 6.71 5.17

Benthic Pore Water 4.10 4.07 3.95

MN sugarbeet ground a

*0.78 (4) 3.12

Water Column 16.87 12.02 7.42

Benthic Pore Water 4.87 4.83 4.78

OR berries ground a

*0.65 (6) 3.90

Water Column 6.59 4.22 2.90

Benthic Pore Water 2.55 2.48 2.33

OR snapbeans grounda

*0.44 (2) 0.88

Water Column 7.89 5.82 4.60

Benthic Pore Water 4.14 4.12 3.69

a

 A chosen representative scenario for spray or soil incorporated applications of fluazinam to agricultural crops (sugarbeet, a surrogate 

scenario for ginseng).

Previously reported EECs are much higher:

Peanuts 0.78 lb x 2 = 1.56 lb

 Peak = 0.022 ppm; 21 day = 0.014 ppm; 60 day = 0.009 ppm

Potato 0.27 lb x 7 = 1.89 lb

 Peak = 0.006 ppm; 21 day = 0.004 ppm; 60 day = 0.003 ppm

FL CABBAGE

stored as fluazina.out

Chemical: Fluazinam

PRZM environment: FLcabbageC.txt modified Satday, 12 October 2002 at 15:39:00

EXAMS environment: pond298.exv modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at 16:33:30

Metfile: w12842.dvf modified Wedday, 3 July 2002 at 09:04:28

Water segment concentrations (ppb)

Year Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly

1961 0.001722 0.0004178 7.958e-005 2.785e-005 1.857e-005 4.579e-006

1962 0.5145 0.4607 0.3396 0.228 0.1928 0.1406

1963 0.9845 0.9087 0.7543 0.5511 0.4476 0.2694

1964 1.517 1.365 0.9475 0.7801 0.7072 0.4538

1965 0.7856 0.7063 0.5654 0.4661 0.4284 0.2479

1966 0.8352 0.7849 0.5699 0.4316 0.385 0.2609

1967 0.813 0.7467 0.5666 0.4595 0.4037 0.2427

1968 0.962 0.888 0.6681 0.5354 0.471 0.2521

1969 1.073 1.01 0.8103 0.5729 0.5625 0.4025

1970 0.8611 0.7894 0.6101 0.5383 0.5027 0.3046

1971 1.521 1.364 0.9363 0.585 0.53 0.3786

1972 0.7528 0.6834 0.5622 0.4349 0.435 0.3097

1973 0.9203 0.8308 0.6048 0.3869 0.3235 0.2372

1974 2.366 2.105 1.408 0.8491 0.6883 0.3331
27

27

1975 1.13 1.011 0.8044 0.6204 0.5372 0.2848

1976 1.76 1.596 1.13 0.8277 0.6929 0.3345

1977 0.4972 0.4614 0.3599 0.2913 0.2576 0.1751

1978 1.069 0.9763 0.7109 0.4698 0.4041 0.2348

1979 4.086 3.705 2.568 1.541 1.246 0.6898

1980 0.7344 0.6739 0.5053 0.4336 0.4194 0.296

1981 2.125 1.903 1.289 0.7904 0.6348 0.422

1982 1.098 1.003 0.8101 0.7063 0.6179 0.4407

1983 0.9981 0.9227 0.7409 0.6922 0.6299 0.3727

1984 0.5738 0.5208 0.3745 0.2901 0.285 0.2195

1985 1.099 0.9772 0.6643 0.4925 0.4741 0.2496

1986 1.408 1.266 0.9021 0.5569 0.4579 0.267

1987 1.924 1.735 1.235 0.8461 0.7382 0.3903

1988 0.7271 0.6625 0.5273 0.3965 0.3638 0.2878

1989 0.6158 0.5773 0.452 0.4202 0.3966 0.2265

1990 0.8304 0.753 0.5782 0.439 0.3735 0.2625

Sorted results

Prob. Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly

0.032258064516129 4.086 3.705 2.568 1.541 1.246 0.6898

0.0645161290322581 2.366 2.105 1.408 0.8491 0.7382 0.4538

0.0967741935483871 2.125 1.903 1.289 0.8461 0.7072 0.4407

0.129032258064516 1.924 1.735 1.235 0.8277 0.6929 0.422

0.161290322580645 1.76 1.596 1.13 0.7904 0.6883 0.4025

0.193548387096774 1.521 1.365 0.9475 0.7801 0.6348 0.3903

0.225806451612903 1.517 1.364 0.9363 0.7063 0.6299 0.3786

0.258064516129032 1.408 1.266 0.9021 0.6922 0.6179 0.3727

0.290322580645161 1.13 1.011 0.8103 0.6204 0.5625 0.3345

0.32258064516129 1.099 1.01 0.8101 0.585 0.5372 0.3331

0.354838709677419 1.098 1.003 0.8044 0.5729 0.53 0.3097

0.387096774193548 1.073 0.9772 0.7543 0.5569 0.5027 0.3046

0.419354838709677 1.069 0.9763 0.7409 0.5511 0.4741 0.296

0.451612903225806 0.9981 0.9227 0.7109 0.5383 0.471 0.2878

0.483870967741936 0.9845 0.9087 0.6681 0.5354 0.4579

0.2848

0.516129032258065 0.962 0.888 0.6643 0.4925 0.4476 0.2694

0.548387096774194 0.9203 0.8308 0.6101 0.4698 0.435 0.267

0.580645161290323 0.8611 0.7894 0.6048 0.4661 0.4284

0.2625

0.612903225806452 0.8352 0.7849 0.5782 0.4595 0.4194

0.2609

0.645161290322581 0.8304 0.753 0.5699 0.439 0.4041 0.2521

0.67741935483871 0.813 0.7467 0.5666 0.4349 0.4037 0.2496

0.709677419354839 0.7856 0.7063 0.5654 0.4336 0.3966

0.2479

0.741935483870968 0.7528 0.6834 0.5622 0.4316 0.385 0.2427

0.774193548387097 0.7344 0.6739 0.5273 0.4202 0.3735

0.2372

0.806451612903226 0.7271 0.6625 0.5053 0.3965 0.3638

0.2348

0.838709677419355 0.6158 0.5773 0.452 0.3869 0.3235 0.2265

0.870967741935484 0.5738 0.5208 0.3745 0.2913 0.285 0.2195

0.903225806451613 0.5145 0.4614 0.3599 0.2901 0.2576

0.1751

0.935483870967742 0.4972 0.4607 0.3396 0.228 0.1928 0.1406
28

28

0.967741935483871 0.001722 0.0004178 7.958e-005 2.785e-005 1.857e-005

4.579e-006

0.1 2.1049 1.8862 1.2836 0.84426 0.70577 0.43883

Average of yearly averages: 0.2995568193

Inputs generated by pe4.pl - 8-August-2003

Data used for this run:

Output File: fluazina

Metfile: w12842.dvf

PRZM scenario: FLcabbageC.txt

EXAMS environment file: pond298.exv

Chemical Name: Fluazinam

Description Variable Name Value Units Comments

Molecular weight mwt 465.1 g/mol

Henry's Law Const. henry 6.73e-7 atm-m^3/mol

Vapor Pressure vapr 8.25e-6 torr

Solubility sol 0.71 mg/L

Kd Kd mg/L

Koc Koc 1957.5 mg/L

Photolysis half-life kdp 2.5 days Half-life

Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 91.7 days Halfife

Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 0 days Halfife

Aerobic Soil Metabolism asm 396 days Halfife

Hydrolysis: pH 7 42 days Half-life

Method: CAM 4 integer See PRZM manual

Incorporation Depth: DEPI 15.2 cm

Application Rate: TAPP 2.242 kg/ha

Application Efficiency: APPEFF 1.00 fraction

Spray Drift DRFT 0.00 fraction of application rate applied to pond

Application Date Date 22-12 dd/mm or dd/mmm or dd-mm or dd-mmm

Record 17: FILTRA

IPSCND 1

UPTKF 0

Record 18: PLVKRT 0

PLDKRT 0

FEXTRC 0.5

Flag for Index Res. Run IR Pond

Flag for runoff calc. RUNOFF none none, monthly or total(average of 

entire run)

stored as fluazinaben.out

Chemical: Fluazinam

PRZM environment: FLcabbageC.txt modified Satday, 12 October 2002 at 15:39:00

EXAMS environment: pond298.exv modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at 16:33:30

Metfile: w12842.dvf modified Wedday, 3 July 2002 at 09:04:28

Benthic segment concentrations (ppb)

Year Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly

1961 8.871e-006 5.065e-006 9.648e-007 3.377e-007 2.251e-007 5.551e-008

1962 0.1805 0.1805 0.1793 0.1737 0.1686 0.1136

1963 0.3499 0.3498 0.3477 0.3335 0.3181 0.2498

1964 0.5288 0.5287 0.5252 0.519 0.5115 0.43
29

29

1965 0.3432 0.3431 0.3409 0.329 0.3181 0.256

1966 0.3263 0.3262 0.3243 0.3146 0.309 0.26

1967 0.3413 0.3412 0.3389 0.3259 0.3131 0.2318

1968 0.357 0.3569 0.3549 0.3512 0.3465 0.2407

1969 0.4915 0.4914 0.4884 0.4777 0.4795 0.3855

1970 0.4388 0.4387 0.4359 0.4237 0.414 0.3213

1971 0.4511 0.4509 0.4478 0.432 0.4272 0.3479

1972 0.3787 0.3786 0.376 0.3634 0.3571 0.3137

1973 0.312 0.3119 0.3104 0.2988 0.2856 0.242

1974 0.5254 0.5252 0.5232 0.5059 0.4875 0.3092

1975 0.4075 0.4074 0.4048 0.3968 0.3927 0.2818

1976 0.509 0.5089 0.5055 0.4908 0.4789 0.3267

1977 0.2855 0.2855 0.2839 0.2787 0.2714 0.1987

1978 0.3243 0.3242 0.3223 0.3104 0.3019 0.2245

1979 1.023 1.023 1.016 0.9746 0.9348 0.622

1980 0.4286 0.4244 0.4073 0.3823 0.3779 0.3345

1981 0.477 0.4769 0.4745 0.4651 0.4484 0.3835

1982 0.5612 0.5611 0.5575 0.5397 0.5239 0.4482

1983 0.5084 0.5083 0.5051 0.4871 0.4782 0.3756

1984 0.2609 0.2608 0.2596 0.2518 0.2495 0.2298

1985 0.3637 0.3636 0.3612 0.3475 0.3381 0.2259

1986 0.3868 0.3867 0.3844 0.3722 0.3586 0.2767

1987 0.5597 0.5596 0.556 0.5471 0.5325 0.3698

1988 0.3436 0.3435 0.3414 0.3286 0.3179 0.282

1989 0.3073 0.3073 0.3052 0.2971 0.2904 0.2261

1990 0.3367 0.3366 0.3346 0.3216 0.3073 0.2634

Sorted results

Prob. Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly

0.032258064516129 1.023 1.023 1.016 0.9746 0.9348 0.622

0.0645161290322581 0.5612 0.5611 0.5575 0.5471 0.5325

0.4482

0.0967741935483871 0.5597 0.5596 0.556 0.5397 0.5239

0.43

0.129032258064516 0.5288 0.5287 0.5252 0.519 0.5115 0.3855

0.161290322580645 0.5254 0.5252 0.5232 0.5059 0.4875

0.3835

0.193548387096774 0.509 0.5089 0.5055 0.4908 0.4795 0.3756

0.225806451612903 0.5084 0.5083 0.5051 0.4871 0.4789

0.3698

0.258064516129032 0.4915 0.4914 0.4884 0.4777 0.4782

0.3479

0.290322580645161 0.477 0.4769 0.4745 0.4651 0.4484 0.3345

0.32258064516129 0.4511 0.4509 0.4478 0.432 0.4272 0.3267

0.354838709677419 0.4388 0.4387 0.4359 0.4237 0.414 0.3213

0.387096774193548 0.4286 0.4244 0.4073 0.3968 0.3927

0.3137

0.419354838709677 0.4075 0.4074 0.4048 0.3823 0.3779

0.3092

0.451612903225806 0.3868 0.3867 0.3844 0.3722 0.3586

0.282

0.483870967741936 0.3787 0.3786 0.376 0.3634 0.3571 0.2818

0.516129032258065 0.3637 0.3636 0.3612 0.3512 0.3465

0.2767

0.548387096774194 0.357 0.3569 0.3549 0.3475 0.3381 0.2634
30

30

0.580645161290323 0.3499 0.3498 0.3477 0.3335 0.3181

0.26

0.612903225806452 0.3436 0.3435 0.3414 0.329 0.3181 0.256

0.645161290322581 0.3432 0.3431 0.3409 0.3286 0.3179

0.2498

0.67741935483871 0.3413 0.3412 0.3389 0.3259 0.3131

0.242

0.709677419354839 0.3367 0.3366 0.3346 0.3216 0.309 0.2407

0.741935483870968 0.3263 0.3262 0.3243 0.3146 0.3073

0.2318

0.774193548387097 0.3243 0.3242 0.3223 0.3104 0.3019

0.2298

0.806451612903226 0.312 0.3119 0.3104 0.2988 0.2904 0.2261

0.838709677419355 0.3073 0.3073 0.3052 0.2971 0.2856

0.2259

0.870967741935484 0.2855 0.2855 0.2839 0.2787 0.2714

0.2245

0.903225806451613 0.2609 0.2608 0.2596 0.2518 0.2495

0.1987

0.935483870967742 0.1805 0.1805 0.1793 0.1737 0.1686

0.1136

0.967741935483871 8.871e-006 5.065e-006 9.648e-007 3.377e-007 2.251e-007

5.551e-008

0.1 0.55661 0.55651 0.55292 0.53763 0.52266 0.42555

Average of yearly averages: 0.292356668517

Inputs generated by pe4.pl - 8-August-2003

Data used for this run:

Output File: fluazina

Metfile: w12842.dvf

PRZM scenario: FLcabbageC.txt

EXAMS environment file: pond298.exv

Chemical Name: Fluazinam

Description Variable Name Value Units Comments

Molecular weight mwt 465.1 g/mol

Henry's Law Const. henry 6.73e-7 atm-m^3/mol

Vapor Pressure vapr 8.25e-6 torr

Solubility sol 0.71 mg/L

Kd Kd mg/L

Koc Koc 1957.5 mg/L

Photolysis half-life kdp 2.5 days Half-life

Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 91.7 days Halfife

Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 0 days Halfife

Aerobic Soil Metabolism asm 396 days Halfife

Hydrolysis: pH 7 42 days Half-life

Method: CAM 4 integer See PRZM manual

Incorporation Depth: DEPI 15.2 cm

Application Rate: TAPP 2.242 kg/ha

Application Efficiency: APPEFF 1.00 fraction

Spray Drift DRFT 0.00 fraction of application rate applied to pond

Application Date Date 22-12 dd/mm or dd/mmm or dd-mm or dd-mmm

Record 17: FILTRA

IPSCND 1

UPTKF 0
31

31

Record 18: PLVKRT 0

PLDKRT 0

FEXTRC 0.5

Flag for Index Res. Run IR Pond

Flag for runoff calc. RUNOFF none none, monthly or total(average of 

entire run)

MI BEANS

stored as fluazina.out

Chemical: Fluazinam

PRZM environment: MIbeansC.txt modified Monday, 10 May 2004 at 06:24:24

EXAMS environment: pond298.exv modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at 16:33:30

Metfile: w14826.dvf modified Wedday, 3 July 2002 at 09:05:38

Water segment concentrations (ppb)

Year Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly

1961 5.586 5.11 4.44 3.196 2.754 0.9794

1962 1.886 1.775 1.48 1.303 1.259 1.108

1963 2.18 2.019 1.761 1.432 1.261 0.8127

1964 2.013 1.878 1.498 1.293 1.164 0.8554

1965 6.369 5.781 4.159 3.025 2.56 1.291

1966 1.665 1.568 1.433 1.307 1.242 1.012

1967 3.02 2.781 2.119 1.627 1.611 1.035

1968 10.73 9.758 7.034 4.652 4.04 2.028

1969 3.064 2.854 2.549 2.038 1.912 1.599

1970 3.5 3.232 2.695 2.591 2.444 1.33

1971 2.308 2.135 1.584 1.352 1.323 1.066

1972 3.315 3.052 2.409 2.193 2.192 1.316

1973 2.877 2.655 2.248 1.859 1.813 1.329

1974 1.818 1.767 1.605 1.536 1.518 1.241

1975 13.62 12.33 10.27 6.879 5.731 2.364

1976 3.476 3.255 2.808 2.642 2.507 1.953

1977 2.356 2.21 1.885 1.638 1.504 1.201

1978 3.298 3.095 2.617 1.869 1.644 1.036

1979 1.857 1.722 1.411 1.122 1.084 0.8726

1980 4.419 4.026 3.223 2.548 2.462 1.252

1981 4.965 4.661 3.734 3.382 2.997 1.693

1982 3.153 2.928 2.307 1.952 1.869 1.448

1983 3.277 3.142 2.482 2.03 1.867 1.257

1984 2.67 2.483 2.092 1.971 1.866 1.235

1985 9.5 8.695 6.761 5.224 4.474 2.145

1986 7.483 7.031 6.208 5.531 4.769 2.489

1987 5.691 5.421 4.452 3.634 3.196 2.147

1988 3.913 3.608 2.857 2.437 2.266 1.642

1989 5.471 5.171 4.1 3.71 3.374 1.84

1990 3.14 2.946 2.386 2.233 2.173 1.553

Sorted results

Prob. Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly

0.032258064516129 13.62 12.33 10.27 6.879 5.731 2.489

0.0645161290322581 10.73 9.758 7.034 5.531 4.769 2.364

0.0967741935483871 9.5 8.695 6.761 5.224 4.474 2.147

0.129032258064516 7.483 7.031 6.208 4.652 4.04 2.145

0.161290322580645 6.369 5.781 4.452 3.71 3.374 2.028

0.193548387096774 5.691 5.421 4.44 3.634 3.196 1.953
32

32

0.225806451612903 5.586 5.171 4.159 3.382 2.997 1.84

0.258064516129032 5.471 5.11 4.1 3.196 2.754 1.693

0.290322580645161 4.965 4.661 3.734 3.025 2.56 1.642

0.32258064516129 4.419 4.026 3.223 2.642 2.507 1.599

0.354838709677419 3.913 3.608 2.857 2.591 2.462 1.553

0.387096774193548 3.5 3.255 2.808 2.548 2.444 1.448

0.419354838709677 3.476 3.232 2.695 2.437 2.266 1.33

0.451612903225806 3.315 3.142 2.617 2.233 2.192 1.329

0.483870967741936 3.298 3.095 2.549 2.193 2.173 1.316

0.516129032258065 3.277 3.052 2.482 2.038 1.912 1.291

0.548387096774194 3.153 2.946 2.409 2.03 1.869 1.257

0.580645161290323 3.14 2.928 2.386 1.971 1.867 1.252

0.612903225806452 3.064 2.854 2.307 1.952 1.866 1.241

0.645161290322581 3.02 2.781 2.248 1.869 1.813 1.235

0.67741935483871 2.877 2.655 2.119 1.859 1.644 1.201

0.709677419354839 2.67 2.483 2.092 1.638 1.611 1.108

0.741935483870968 2.356 2.21 1.885 1.627 1.518 1.066

0.774193548387097 2.308 2.135 1.761 1.536 1.504 1.036

0.806451612903226 2.18 2.019 1.605 1.432 1.323 1.035

0.838709677419355 2.013 1.878 1.584 1.352 1.261 1.012

0.870967741935484 1.886 1.775 1.498 1.307 1.259 0.9794

0.903225806451613 1.857 1.767 1.48 1.303 1.242 0.8726

0.935483870967742 1.818 1.722 1.433 1.293 1.164 0.8554

0.967741935483871 1.665 1.568 1.411 1.122 1.084 0.8127

0.1 9.2983 8.5286 6.7057 5.1668 4.4306 2.1468

Average of yearly averages: 1.43767

Inputs generated by pe4.pl - 8-August-2003

Data used for this run:

Output File: fluazina

Metfile: w14826.dvf

PRZM scenario: MIbeansC.txt

EXAMS environment file: pond298.exv

Chemical Name: Fluazinam

Description Variable Name Value Units Comments

Molecular weight mwt 465.1 g/mol

Henry's Law Const. henry 6.73e-7 atm-m^3/mol

Vapor Pressure vapr 8.25e-6 torr

Solubility sol 0.71 mg/L

Kd Kd mg/L

Koc Koc 1957.5 mg/L

Photolysis half-life kdp 2.5 days Half-life

Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 91.7 days Halfife

Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 0 days Halfife

Aerobic Soil Metabolism asm 396 days Halfife

Hydrolysis: pH 7 42 days Half-life

Method: CAM 2 integer See PRZM manual

Incorporation Depth: DEPI 0.0 cm

Application Rate: TAPP 0.493 kg/ha

Application Efficiency: APPEFF 0.99 fraction

Spray Drift DRFT 0.01 fraction of application rate applied to pond

Application Date Date 17-07 dd/mm or dd/mmm or dd-mm or dd-mmm

Interval 1 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single app.

Record 17: FILTRA
33

33

IPSCND 1

UPTKF 0

Record 18: PLVKRT 0

PLDKRT 0

FEXTRC 0.5

Flag for Index Res. Run IR Pond

Flag for runoff calc. RUNOFF none none, monthly or total(average of 

entire run)

stored as fluazinaben.out

Chemical: Fluazinam

PRZM environment: MIbeansC.txt modified Monday, 10 May 2004 at 06:24:24

EXAMS environment: pond298.exv modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at 16:33:30

Metfile: w14826.dvf modified Wedday, 3 July 2002 at 09:05:38

Benthic segment concentrations (ppb)

Year Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly

1961 2.643 2.643 2.638 2.577 2.497 0.9159

1962 1.947 1.932 1.869 1.739 1.652 1.345

1963 1.37 1.37 1.36 1.318 1.279 0.9376

1964 1.312 1.312 1.304 1.252 1.211 0.9191

1965 2.558 2.557 2.543 2.447 2.357 1.356

1966 1.874 1.863 1.814 1.695 1.612 1.232

1967 1.585 1.585 1.576 1.551 1.553 1.076

1968 4.075 4.074 4.05 3.905 3.744 2.087

1969 2.861 2.841 2.757 2.597 2.471 1.954

1970 2.385 2.384 2.374 2.324 2.276 1.426

1971 1.964 1.949 1.887 1.757 1.684 1.261

1972 2.072 2.072 2.063 2.03 2.007 1.334

1973 1.816 1.815 1.808 1.74 1.667 1.426

1974 1.768 1.767 1.746 1.694 1.66 1.422

1975 5.206 5.205 5.176 4.994 4.801 2.267

1976 3.775 3.751 3.644 3.402 3.244 2.411

1977 1.869 1.855 1.797 1.67 1.588 1.39

1978 1.85 1.849 1.839 1.773 1.701 1.173

1979 1.406 1.406 1.396 1.327 1.276 1.028

1980 2.313 2.312 2.3 2.223 2.193 1.286

1981 2.958 2.957 2.943 2.851 2.776 1.791

1982 2.337 2.319 2.245 2.086 1.981 1.713

1983 1.948 1.947 1.94 1.904 1.858 1.406

1984 1.991 1.991 1.976 1.913 1.865 1.419

1985 4.099 4.098 4.076 3.959 3.823 2.121

1986 4.42 4.419 4.395 4.243 4.091 2.687

1987 3.416 3.416 3.398 3.281 3.151 2.533

1988 2.598 2.579 2.501 2.331 2.245 1.926

1989 3.34 3.339 3.321 3.2 3.104 2.023

1990 2.382 2.364 2.302 2.143 2.089 1.771

Sorted results

Prob. Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly

0.032258064516129 5.206 5.205 5.176 4.994 4.801 2.687

0.0645161290322581 4.42 4.419 4.395 4.243 4.091 2.533

0.0967741935483871 4.099 4.098 4.076 3.959 3.823 2.411

0.129032258064516 4.075 4.074 4.05 3.905 3.744 2.267
34

34

0.161290322580645 3.775 3.751 3.644 3.402 3.244 2.121

0.193548387096774 3.416 3.416 3.398 3.281 3.151 2.087

0.225806451612903 3.34 3.339 3.321 3.2 3.104 2.023

0.258064516129032 2.958 2.957 2.943 2.851 2.776 1.954

0.290322580645161 2.861 2.841 2.757 2.597 2.497 1.926

0.32258064516129 2.643 2.643 2.638 2.577 2.471 1.791

0.354838709677419 2.598 2.579 2.543 2.447 2.357 1.771

0.387096774193548 2.558 2.557 2.501 2.331 2.276 1.713

0.419354838709677 2.385 2.384 2.374 2.324 2.245 1.426

0.451612903225806 2.382 2.364 2.302 2.223 2.193 1.426

0.483870967741936 2.337 2.319 2.3 2.143 2.089 1.422

0.516129032258065 2.313 2.312 2.245 2.086 2.007 1.419

0.548387096774194 2.072 2.072 2.063 2.03 1.981 1.406

0.580645161290323 1.991 1.991 1.976 1.913 1.865 1.39

0.612903225806452 1.964 1.949 1.94 1.904 1.858 1.356

0.645161290322581 1.948 1.947 1.887 1.773 1.701 1.345

0.67741935483871 1.947 1.932 1.869 1.757 1.684 1.334

0.709677419354839 1.874 1.863 1.839 1.74 1.667 1.286

0.741935483870968 1.869 1.855 1.814 1.739 1.66 1.261

0.774193548387097 1.85 1.849 1.808 1.695 1.652 1.232

0.806451612903226 1.816 1.815 1.797 1.694 1.612 1.173

0.838709677419355 1.768 1.767 1.746 1.67 1.588 1.076

0.870967741935484 1.585 1.585 1.576 1.551 1.553 1.028

0.903225806451613 1.406 1.406 1.396 1.327 1.279 0.9376

0.935483870967742 1.37 1.37 1.36 1.318 1.276 0.9191

0.967741935483871 1.312 1.312 1.304 1.252 1.211 0.9159

0.1 4.0966 4.0956 4.0734 3.9536 3.8151 2.3966

Average of yearly averages: 1.58788666666667

Inputs generated by pe4.pl - 8-August-2003

Data used for this run:

Output File: fluazina

Metfile: w14826.dvf

PRZM scenario: MIbeansC.txt

EXAMS environment file: pond298.exv

Chemical Name: Fluazinam

Description Variable Name Value Units Comments

Molecular weight mwt 465.1 g/mol

Henry's Law Const. henry 6.73e-7 atm-m^3/mol

Vapor Pressure vapr 8.25e-6 torr

Solubility sol 0.71 mg/L

Kd Kd mg/L

Koc Koc 1957.5 mg/L

Photolysis half-life kdp 2.5 days Half-life

Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 91.7 days Halfife

Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 0 days Halfife

Aerobic Soil Metabolism asm 396 days Halfife

Hydrolysis: pH 7 42 days Half-life

Method: CAM 2 integer See PRZM manual

Incorporation Depth: DEPI 0.0 cm

Application Rate: TAPP 0.493 kg/ha

Application Efficiency: APPEFF 0.99 fraction

Spray Drift DRFT 0.01 fraction of application rate applied to pond

Application Date Date 17-07 dd/mm or dd/mmm or dd-mm or dd-mmm
35

35

Interval 1 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single app.

Record 17: FILTRA

IPSCND 1

UPTKF 0

Record 18: PLVKRT 0

PLDKRT 0

FEXTRC 0.5

Flag for Index Res. Run IR Pond

Flag for runoff calc. RUNOFF none none, monthly or total(average of 

entire run)

MN SUGARBEET

stored as fluazina.out

Chemical: Fluazinam

PRZM environment: MNsugarbeetC.txt modified Satday, 12 October 2002 at 16:05:10

EXAMS environment: pond298.exv modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at 16:33:30

Metfile: w14914.dvf modified Wedday, 3 July 2002 at 09:05:52

Water segment concentrations (ppb)

Year Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly

1961 6.052 5.732 4.201 2.715 2.224 0.6911

1962 3.295 3.004 2.61 2.338 2.08 1.39

1963 6.295 5.662 4.383 2.837 2.312 1.342

1964 6.94 6.255 4.68 3.17 3.173 1.858

1965 6.888 6.259 4.557 3.08 2.592 1.916

1966 4.073 3.787 3.193 2.382 2.082 1.5

1967 3.281 3.077 2.411 1.769 1.567 1.042

1968 2.976 2.711 2.137 1.574 1.377 0.9994

1969 6.941 6.267 4.441 3.344 2.909 1.8

1970 20.06 18 12.32 7.448 6.069 2.704

1971 12.52 11.32 7.952 7.191 6.569 3.34

1972 4.949 4.69 3.983 3.21 3.185 2.38

1973 14.05 12.72 9.301 7.149 6.022 2.466

1974 10.17 9.218 6.977 4.81 4.298 3.028

1975 7.703 7.195 5.303 3.876 3.772 2.632

1976 2.365 2.266 1.969 1.755 1.745 1.129

1977 16.88 15.08 10.14 6.282 6 3.794

1978 10.86 9.855 7.25 4.742 3.989 2.978

1979 11.15 10.16 7.452 4.926 3.825 2.857

1980 12.19 11.11 8.13 6.666 5.594 2.891

1981 5.132 4.707 3.592 2.593 2.368 1.907

1982 25.06 22.51 15.35 9.347 7.503 2.717

1983 4.994 4.68 3.69 3.241 3.162 2.448

1984 16.81 15.62 12.15 7.687 6.032 2.64

1985 4.425 4.119 3.554 2.914 2.844 2.307

1986 7.613 6.956 5.147 3.517 3.061 2.208

1987 2.767 2.588 2.325 1.87 1.682 1.285

1988 9.33 8.647 6.066 3.723 3.073 1.406

1989 15.55 14.06 10.84 6.783 5.584 2.906

1990 3.428 3.18 2.504 2.324 2.203 1.847

Sorted results

Prob. Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly

0.032258064516129 25.06 22.51 15.35 9.347 7.503 3.794

0.0645161290322581 20.06 18 12.32 7.687 6.569 3.34
36

36

0.0967741935483871 16.88 15.62 12.15 7.448 6.069 3.028

0.129032258064516 16.81 15.08 10.84 7.191 6.032 2.978

0.161290322580645 15.55 14.06 10.14 7.149 6.022 2.906

0.193548387096774 14.05 12.72 9.301 6.783 6 2.891

0.225806451612903 12.52 11.32 8.13 6.666 5.594 2.857

0.258064516129032 12.19 11.11 7.952 6.282 5.584 2.717

0.290322580645161 11.15 10.16 7.452 4.926 4.298 2.704

0.32258064516129 10.86 9.855 7.25 4.81 3.989 2.64

0.354838709677419 10.17 9.218 6.977 4.742 3.825 2.632

0.387096774193548 9.33 8.647 6.066 3.876 3.772 2.466

0.419354838709677 7.703 7.195 5.303 3.723 3.185 2.448

0.451612903225806 7.613 6.956 5.147 3.517 3.173 2.38

0.483870967741936 6.941 6.267 4.68 3.344 3.162 2.307

0.516129032258065 6.94 6.259 4.557 3.241 3.073 2.208

0.548387096774194 6.888 6.255 4.441 3.21 3.061 1.916

0.580645161290323 6.295 5.732 4.383 3.17 2.909 1.907

0.612903225806452 6.052 5.662 4.201 3.08 2.844 1.858

0.645161290322581 5.132 4.707 3.983 2.914 2.592 1.847

0.67741935483871 4.994 4.69 3.69 2.837 2.368 1.8

0.709677419354839 4.949 4.68 3.592 2.715 2.312 1.5

0.741935483870968 4.425 4.119 3.554 2.593 2.224 1.406

0.774193548387097 4.073 3.787 3.193 2.382 2.203 1.39

0.806451612903226 3.428 3.18 2.61 2.338 2.082 1.342

0.838709677419355 3.295 3.077 2.504 2.324 2.08 1.285

0.870967741935484 3.281 3.004 2.411 1.87 1.745 1.129

0.903225806451613 2.976 2.711 2.325 1.769 1.682 1.042

0.935483870967742 2.767 2.588 2.137 1.755 1.567 0.9994

0.967741935483871 2.365 2.266 1.969 1.574 1.377 0.6911

0.1 16.873 15.566 12.019 7.4223 6.0653 3.023

Average of yearly averages: 2.14695

Inputs generated by pe4.pl - 8-August-2003

Data used for this run:

Output File: fluazina

Metfile: w14914.dvf

PRZM scenario: MNsugarbeetC.txt

EXAMS environment file: pond298.exv

Chemical Name: Fluazinam

Description Variable Name Value Units Comments

Molecular weight mwt 465.1 g/mol

Henry's Law Const. henry 6.73e-7 atm-m^3/mol

Vapor Pressure vapr 8.25e-6 torr

Solubility sol 0.71 mg/L

Kd Kd mg/L

Koc Koc 1957.5 mg/L

Photolysis half-life kdp 2.5 days Half-life

Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 91.7 days Halfife

Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 0 days Halfife

Aerobic Soil Metabolism asm 396 days Halfife

Hydrolysis: pH 7 42 days Half-life

Method: CAM 2 integer See PRZM manual

Incorporation Depth: DEPI 0.0 cm

Application Rate: TAPP 0.874 kg/ha

Application Efficiency: APPEFF 0.99 fraction
37

37

Spray Drift DRFT 0.01 fraction of application rate applied to pond

Application Date Date 08-08 dd/mm or dd/mmm or dd-mm or dd-mmm

Interval 1 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single app.

Interval 2 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single app.

Interval 3 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single app.

Record 17: FILTRA

IPSCND 1

UPTKF 0

Record 18: PLVKRT 0

PLDKRT 0

FEXTRC 0.5

Flag for Index Res. Run IR Pond

Flag for runoff calc. RUNOFF none none, monthly or total(average of 

entire run)

stored as fluazinaben.out

Chemical: Fluazinam

PRZM environment: MNsugarbeetC.txt modified Satday, 12 October 2002 at 16:05:10

EXAMS environment: pond298.exv modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at 16:33:30

Metfile: w14914.dvf modified Wedday, 3 July 2002 at 09:05:52

Benthic segment concentrations (ppb)

Year Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly

1961 1.704 1.704 1.695 1.645 1.593 0.4861

1962 1.979 1.979 1.968 1.905 1.844 1.386

1963 2.02 2.019 2.007 1.932 1.852 1.355

1964 2.769 2.768 2.754 2.659 2.554 1.752

1965 2.307 2.306 2.293 2.222 2.164 1.916

1966 1.909 1.908 1.897 1.832 1.787 1.56

1967 1.457 1.457 1.449 1.406 1.357 1.149

1968 1.152 1.151 1.145 1.119 1.091 0.9422

1969 2.473 2.473 2.458 2.407 2.355 1.636

1970 4.776 4.775 4.75 4.601 4.437 2.307

1971 5.2 5.199 5.179 5.042 4.844 3.241

1972 4.603 4.568 4.425 4.11 3.922 2.902

1973 4.658 4.657 4.631 4.482 4.325 2.115

1974 3.806 3.789 3.767 3.644 3.618 3.105

1975 3.392 3.368 3.263 3.157 3.086 2.785

1976 2.471 2.452 2.373 2.206 2.131 1.439

1977 4.864 4.863 4.837 4.798 4.693 3.077

1978 4.377 4.35 4.227 3.938 3.733 3.327

1979 3.69 3.69 3.673 3.494 3.068 2.717

1980 4.64 4.638 4.615 4.467 4.294 2.965

1981 3.464 3.437 3.323 3.083 2.912 2.253

1982 5.427 5.426 5.402 5.252 4.632 2.068

1983 4.868 4.833 4.683 4.352 4.137 2.979

1984 4.747 4.746 4.725 4.588 3.914 2.188

1985 4.327 4.297 4.164 3.872 3.693 2.779

1986 3.106 3.105 3.088 2.982 2.868 2.116

1987 2.234 2.217 2.144 1.99 1.882 1.492

1988 2.516 2.516 2.502 2.42 2.332 1.243

1989 4.829 4.828 4.802 4.631 4.451 2.692

1990 3.534 3.506 3.392 3.148 2.977 2.204

Sorted results

Prob. Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly
38

38

0.032258064516129 5.427 5.426 5.402 5.252 4.844 3.327

0.0645161290322581 5.2 5.199 5.179 5.042 4.693 3.241

0.0967741935483871 4.868 4.863 4.837 4.798 4.632 3.105

0.129032258064516 4.864 4.833 4.802 4.631 4.451 3.077

0.161290322580645 4.829 4.828 4.75 4.601 4.437 2.979

0.193548387096774 4.776 4.775 4.725 4.588 4.325 2.965

0.225806451612903 4.747 4.746 4.683 4.482 4.294 2.902

0.258064516129032 4.658 4.657 4.631 4.467 4.137 2.785

0.290322580645161 4.64 4.638 4.615 4.352 3.922 2.779

0.32258064516129 4.603 4.568 4.425 4.11 3.914 2.717

0.354838709677419 4.377 4.35 4.227 3.938 3.733 2.692

0.387096774193548 4.327 4.297 4.164 3.872 3.693 2.307

0.419354838709677 3.806 3.789 3.767 3.644 3.618 2.253

0.451612903225806 3.69 3.69 3.673 3.494 3.086 2.204

0.483870967741936 3.534 3.506 3.392 3.157 3.068 2.188

0.516129032258065 3.464 3.437 3.323 3.148 2.977 2.116

0.548387096774194 3.392 3.368 3.263 3.083 2.912 2.115

0.580645161290323 3.106 3.105 3.088 2.982 2.868 2.068

0.612903225806452 2.769 2.768 2.754 2.659 2.554 1.916

0.645161290322581 2.516 2.516 2.502 2.42 2.355 1.752

0.67741935483871 2.473 2.473 2.458 2.407 2.332 1.636

0.709677419354839 2.471 2.452 2.373 2.222 2.164 1.56

0.741935483870968 2.307 2.306 2.293 2.206 2.131 1.492

0.774193548387097 2.234 2.217 2.144 1.99 1.882 1.439

0.806451612903226 2.02 2.019 2.007 1.932 1.852 1.386

0.838709677419355 1.979 1.979 1.968 1.905 1.844 1.355

0.870967741935484 1.909 1.908 1.897 1.832 1.787 1.243

0.903225806451613 1.704 1.704 1.695 1.645 1.593 1.149

0.935483870967742 1.457 1.457 1.449 1.406 1.357 0.9422

0.967741935483871 1.152 1.151 1.145 1.119 1.091 0.4861

0.1 4.8676 4.86 4.8335 4.7813 4.6139 3.1022

Average of yearly averages: 2.13921

Inputs generated by pe4.pl - 8-August-2003

Data used for this run:

Output File: fluazina

Metfile: w14914.dvf

PRZM scenario: MNsugarbeetC.txt

EXAMS environment file: pond298.exv

Chemical Name: Fluazinam

Description Variable Name Value Units Comments

Molecular weight mwt 465.1 g/mol

Henry's Law Const. henry 6.73e-7 atm-m^3/mol

Vapor Pressure vapr 8.25e-6 torr

Solubility sol 0.71 mg/L

Kd Kd mg/L

Koc Koc 1957.5 mg/L

Photolysis half-life kdp 2.5 days Half-life

Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 91.7 days Halfife

Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 0 days Halfife

Aerobic Soil Metabolism asm 396 days Halfife

Hydrolysis: pH 7 42 days Half-life

Method: CAM 2 integer See PRZM manual

Incorporation Depth: DEPI 0.0 cm
39

39

Application Rate: TAPP 0.874 kg/ha

Application Efficiency: APPEFF 0.99 fraction

Spray Drift DRFT 0.01 fraction of application rate applied to pond

Application Date Date 08-08 dd/mm or dd/mmm or dd-mm or dd-mmm

Interval 1 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single app.

Interval 2 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single app.

Interval 3 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single app.

Record 17: FILTRA

IPSCND 1

UPTKF 0

Record 18: PLVKRT 0

PLDKRT 0

FEXTRC 0.5

Flag for Index Res. Run IR Pond

Flag for runoff calc. RUNOFF none none, monthly or total(average of 

entire run)

OR BERRIES

stored as fluazina.out

Chemical: Fluazinam

PRZM environment: ORberriesOP.txt modified Satday, 12 October 2002 at 17:17:16

EXAMS environment: pond298.exv modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at 16:33:30

Metfile: w24232.dvf modified Wedday, 3 July 2002 at 09:06:10

Water segment concentrations (ppb)

Year Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly

1961 2.214 2.006 1.174 0.6995 0.556 0.2962

1962 4.261 3.869 2.853 1.845 1.646 0.9195

1963 2.528 2.322 1.927 1.667 1.503 1.252

1964 6.629 6.216 3.519 1.987 1.495 1.161

1965 4.404 4.107 3.035 2.583 2.204 1.506

1966 4.696 4.409 3.459 2.343 2.106 1.498

1967 3.15 2.944 2.3 1.75 1.569 1.24

1968 3.452 3.22 2.751 2.137 2.128 1.557

1969 3.852 3.552 2.92 2.478 2.182 1.584

1970 3.686 2.752 2.346 2.141 1.93 1.413

1971 3.547 3.244 2.533 1.86 1.627 1.402

1972 3.57 3.277 2.343 1.755 1.559 1.169

1973 6.262 5.691 4.383 3.166 2.301 1.346

1974 3.742 3.467 2.703 2.157 1.911 1.463

1975 2.756 2.538 1.964 1.623 1.383 1.16

1976 1.649 1.562 1.412 1.212 1.167 0.8333

1977 4.371 4.021 3.12 2.028 1.485 0.6977

1978 2.646 2.471 2.079 1.595 1.393 1.069

1979 2.953 2.689 2.238 1.934 1.736 1.124

1980 6.754 6.164 4.251 2.762 2.03 1.359

1981 4.942 4.571 3.657 3.116 2.958 2.004

1982 3.216 2.974 2.489 2.116 1.94 1.446

1983 2.387 2.254 1.921 1.674 1.557 1.251

1984 4.126 3.754 2.994 2.429 1.908 1.21

1985 3.551 3.322 2.758 1.9 1.621 1.185

1986 2.501 2.287 1.832 1.185 1.017 0.898

1987 7.272 6.619 5.582 2.913 2.232 1.434

1988 3.99 3.753 3.262 2.584 2.262 1.543

1989 6.126 5.554 3.941 2.264 1.763 1.174
40

40

1990 3.371 3.207 2.565 2.321 2.035 1.468

Sorted results

Prob. Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly

0.032258064516129 7.272 6.619 5.582 3.166 2.958 2.004

0.0645161290322581 6.754 6.216 4.383 3.116 2.301 1.584

0.0967741935483871 6.629 6.164 4.251 2.913 2.262 1.557

0.129032258064516 6.262 5.691 3.941 2.762 2.232 1.543

0.161290322580645 6.126 5.554 3.657 2.584 2.204 1.506

0.193548387096774 4.942 4.571 3.519 2.583 2.182 1.498

0.225806451612903 4.696 4.409 3.459 2.478 2.128 1.468

0.258064516129032 4.404 4.107 3.262 2.429 2.106 1.463

0.290322580645161 4.371 4.021 3.12 2.343 2.035 1.446

0.32258064516129 4.261 3.869 3.035 2.321 2.03 1.434

0.354838709677419 4.126 3.754 2.994 2.264 1.94 1.413

0.387096774193548 3.99 3.753 2.92 2.157 1.93 1.402

0.419354838709677 3.852 3.552 2.853 2.141 1.911 1.359

0.451612903225806 3.742 3.467 2.758 2.137 1.908 1.346

0.483870967741936 3.686 3.322 2.751 2.116 1.763 1.252

0.516129032258065 3.57 3.277 2.703 2.028 1.736 1.251

0.548387096774194 3.551 3.244 2.565 1.987 1.646 1.24

0.580645161290323 3.547 3.22 2.533 1.934 1.627 1.21

0.612903225806452 3.452 3.207 2.489 1.9 1.621 1.185

0.645161290322581 3.371 2.974 2.346 1.86 1.569 1.174

0.67741935483871 3.216 2.944 2.343 1.845 1.559 1.169

0.709677419354839 3.15 2.752 2.3 1.755 1.557 1.161

0.741935483870968 2.953 2.689 2.238 1.75 1.503 1.16

0.774193548387097 2.756 2.538 2.079 1.674 1.495 1.124

0.806451612903226 2.646 2.471 1.964 1.667 1.485 1.069

0.838709677419355 2.528 2.322 1.927 1.623 1.393 0.9195

0.870967741935484 2.501 2.287 1.921 1.595 1.383 0.898

0.903225806451613 2.387 2.254 1.832 1.212 1.167 0.8333

0.935483870967742 2.214 2.006 1.412 1.185 1.017 0.6977

0.967741935483871 1.649 1.562 1.174 0.6995 0.556 0.2962

0.1 6.5923 6.1167 4.22 2.8979 2.259 1.5556

Average of yearly averages: 1.25542333333333

Inputs generated by pe4.pl - 8-August-2003

Data used for this run:

Output File: fluazina

Metfile: w24232.dvf

PRZM scenario: ORberriesOP.txt

EXAMS environment file: pond298.exv

Chemical Name: Fluazinam

Description Variable Name Value Units Comments

Molecular weight mwt 465.1 g/mol

Henry's Law Const. henry 6.73e-7 atm-m^3/mol

Vapor Pressure vapr 8.25e-6 torr

Solubility sol 0.71 mg/L

Kd Kd mg/L

Koc Koc 1957.5 mg/L

Photolysis half-life kdp 2.5 days Half-life

Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 91.7 days Halfife

Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 0 days Halfife
41

41

Aerobic Soil Metabolism asm 396 days Halfife

Hydrolysis: pH 7 42 days Half-life

Method: CAM 2 integer See PRZM manual

Incorporation Depth: DEPI 0.0 cm

Application Rate: TAPP 0.729 kg/ha

Application Efficiency: APPEFF 0.99 fraction

Spray Drift DRFT 0.01 fraction of application rate applied to pond

Application Date Date 14-05 dd/mm or dd/mmm or dd-mm or dd-mmm

Interval 1 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single app.

Interval 2 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single app.

Interval 3 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single app.

Interval 4 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single app.

Interval 5 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single app.

Record 17: FILTRA

IPSCND 1

UPTKF 0

Record 18: PLVKRT 0

PLDKRT 0

FEXTRC 0.5

Flag for Index Res. Run IR Pond

Flag for runoff calc. RUNOFF none none, monthly or total(average of 

entire run)

stored as fluazinaben.out

Chemical: Fluazinam

PRZM environment: ORberriesOP.txt modified Satday, 12 October 2002 at 17:17:16

EXAMS environment: pond298.exv modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at 16:33:30

Metfile: w24232.dvf modified Wedday, 3 July 2002 at 09:06:10

Benthic segment concentrations (ppb)

Year Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly

1961 0.5574 0.5459 0.4304 0.3502 0.3309 0.1837

1962 1.417 1.417 1.399 1.137 1.005 0.746

1963 1.421 1.42 1.413 1.38 1.36 1.268

1964 1.564 1.519 1.447 1.398 1.346 1.072

1965 2.122 2.122 2.111 2.043 1.982 1.502

1966 1.99 1.99 1.979 1.913 1.867 1.446

1967 1.72 1.719 1.71 1.654 1.631 1.276

1968 1.934 1.933 1.889 1.748 1.672 1.43

1969 2.049 2.043 1.946 1.86 1.776 1.563

1970 2.123 2.123 2.112 2.086 2.045 1.507

1971 1.714 1.714 1.705 1.653 1.6 1.399

1972 1.623 1.622 1.614 1.567 1.518 1.2

1973 2.071 2.065 1.959 1.496 1.338 1.146

1974 2.195 2.195 2.186 2.133 2.068 1.536

1975 1.602 1.602 1.593 1.569 1.526 1.201

1976 1.296 1.296 1.29 1.254 1.234 0.9631

1977 1.434 1.421 1.226 0.8077 0.6812 0.5048

1978 1.59 1.59 1.582 1.541 1.485 1.138

1979 1.587 1.587 1.57 1.479 1.381 1.022

1980 2.074 2.028 1.697 1.612 1.56 1.236

1981 2.571 2.57 2.518 2.351 2.266 1.907

1982 2.569 2.567 2.543 2.439 2.338 1.628

1983 1.574 1.574 1.566 1.548 1.533 1.278

1984 1.685 1.685 1.677 1.479 1.282 1.116

1985 1.664 1.659 1.627 1.545 1.479 1.295
42

42

1986 1.162 1.154 1.121 1.076 1.08 0.9206

1987 2.363 2.352 2.151 1.547 1.48 1.192

1988 2.598 2.597 2.584 2.504 2.418 1.699

1989 1.72 1.713 1.592 1.383 1.339 1.101

1990 2.046 2.046 2.037 1.983 1.932 1.497

Sorted results

Prob. Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly

0.032258064516129 2.598 2.597 2.584 2.504 2.418 1.907

0.0645161290322581 2.571 2.57 2.543 2.439 2.338 1.699

0.0967741935483871 2.569 2.567 2.518 2.351 2.266 1.628

0.129032258064516 2.363 2.352 2.186 2.133 2.068 1.563

0.161290322580645 2.195 2.195 2.151 2.086 2.045 1.536

0.193548387096774 2.123 2.123 2.112 2.043 1.982 1.507

0.225806451612903 2.122 2.122 2.111 1.983 1.932 1.502

0.258064516129032 2.074 2.065 2.037 1.913 1.867 1.497

0.290322580645161 2.071 2.046 1.979 1.86 1.776 1.446

0.32258064516129 2.049 2.043 1.959 1.748 1.672 1.43

0.354838709677419 2.046 2.028 1.946 1.654 1.631 1.399

0.387096774193548 1.99 1.99 1.889 1.653 1.6 1.295

0.419354838709677 1.934 1.933 1.71 1.612 1.56 1.278

0.451612903225806 1.72 1.719 1.705 1.569 1.533 1.276

0.483870967741936 1.72 1.714 1.697 1.567 1.526 1.268

0.516129032258065 1.714 1.713 1.677 1.548 1.518 1.236

0.548387096774194 1.685 1.685 1.627 1.547 1.485 1.201

0.580645161290323 1.664 1.659 1.614 1.545 1.48 1.2

0.612903225806452 1.623 1.622 1.593 1.541 1.479 1.192

0.645161290322581 1.602 1.602 1.592 1.496 1.381 1.146

0.67741935483871 1.59 1.59 1.582 1.479 1.36 1.138

0.709677419354839 1.587 1.587 1.57 1.479 1.346 1.116

0.741935483870968 1.574 1.574 1.566 1.398 1.339 1.101

0.774193548387097 1.564 1.519 1.447 1.383 1.338 1.072

0.806451612903226 1.434 1.421 1.413 1.38 1.282 1.022

0.838709677419355 1.421 1.42 1.399 1.254 1.234 0.9631

0.870967741935484 1.417 1.417 1.29 1.137 1.08 0.9206

0.903225806451613 1.296 1.296 1.226 1.076 1.005 0.746

0.935483870967742 1.162 1.154 1.121 0.8077 0.6812 0.5048

0.967741935483871 0.5574 0.5459 0.4304 0.3502 0.3309

0.1837

0.1 2.5484 2.5455 2.4848 2.3292 2.2462 1.6215

Average of yearly averages: 1.23244

Inputs generated by pe4.pl - 8-August-2003

Data used for this run:

Output File: fluazina

Metfile: w24232.dvf

PRZM scenario: ORberriesOP.txt

EXAMS environment file: pond298.exv

Chemical Name: Fluazinam

Description Variable Name Value Units Comments

Molecular weight mwt 465.1 g/mol

Henry's Law Const. henry 6.73e-7 atm-m^3/mol

Vapor Pressure vapr 8.25e-6 torr

Solubility sol 0.71 mg/L
43

43

Kd Kd mg/L

Koc Koc 1957.5 mg/L

Photolysis half-life kdp 2.5 days Half-life

Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 91.7 days Halfife

Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 0 days Halfife

Aerobic Soil Metabolism asm 396 days Halfife

Hydrolysis: pH 7 42 days Half-life

Method: CAM 2 integer See PRZM manual

Incorporation Depth: DEPI 0.0 cm

Application Rate: TAPP 0.729 kg/ha

Application Efficiency: APPEFF 0.99 fraction

Spray Drift DRFT 0.01 fraction of application rate applied to pond

Application Date Date 14-05 dd/mm or dd/mmm or dd-mm or dd-mmm

Interval 1 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single app.

Interval 2 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single app.

Interval 3 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single app.

Interval 4 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single app.

Interval 5 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single app.

Record 17: FILTRA

IPSCND 1

UPTKF 0

Record 18: PLVKRT 0

PLDKRT 0

FEXTRC 0.5

Flag for Index Res. Run IR Pond

Flag for runoff calc. RUNOFF none none, monthly or total(average of 

entire run)

OR SNAP BEANS

stored as fluazina.out

Chemical: Fluazinam

PRZM environment: ORsnbeansC.txt modified Satday, 12 October 2002 at 16:20:58

EXAMS environment: pond298.exv modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at 16:33:30

Metfile: w24232.dvf modified Wedday, 3 July 2002 at 09:06:10

Water segment concentrations (ppb)

Year Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly

1961 3.537 3.238 2.248 1.514 1.193 0.3204

1962 5.094 4.716 3.879 3.108 2.92 1.464

1963 4.922 4.6 3.977 3.348 2.774 2.052

1964 8.481 7.988 5.374 3.71 2.923 2.061

1965 6.136 5.83 4.679 4.102 3.56 2.246

1966 6.15 5.904 4.773 3.368 3.096 2.074

1967 5.209 4.974 3.952 3.036 2.641 1.843

1968 4.761 4.502 3.98 3.392 3.267 2.472

1969 5.923 5.423 4.922 4.145 3.95 2.437

1970 6.213 5.945 5.309 4.617 4.142 2.759

1971 5.446 5.085 4.559 3.74 3.454 2.533

1972 5.768 5.344 3.726 2.883 2.675 1.863

1973 7.942 7.403 6.287 5.004 3.81 2.224

1974 6.246 5.953 4.838 4.078 3.603 2.505

1975 4.311 4.007 3.429 3.114 2.896 2.055

1976 3.04 2.876 2.688 2.343 2.261 1.342

1977 5.615 5.206 4.097 2.833 2.151 1.023

1978 3.764 3.546 3.066 2.49 2.18 1.485
44

44

1979 4.383 4.2 3.661 3.209 2.827 1.643

1980 7.457 6.861 4.988 3.696 2.755 1.961

1981 7.241 6.701 5.864 5.193 4.881 2.74

1982 5.177 4.926 4.394 4.145 3.821 2.55

1983 4.512 4.328 3.658 3.346 3.216 2.258

1984 5.954 5.643 5.062 4.411 3.576 2.035

1985 3.819 3.666 3.094 2.601 2.374 1.815

1986 5.083 4.794 3.89 2.894 2.441 1.791

1987 9.256 8.473 7.176 3.974 2.909 2.037

1988 6.157 5.774 4.945 3.855 3.397 2.302

1989 5.787 5.339 4.006 2.938 2.593 1.891

1990 4.461 4.211 3.868 3.444 3.083 1.972

Sorted results

Prob. Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly

0.032258064516129 9.256 8.473 7.176 5.193 4.881 2.759

0.0645161290322581 8.481 7.988 6.287 5.004 4.142 2.74

0.0967741935483871 7.942 7.403 5.864 4.617 3.95 2.55

0.129032258064516 7.457 6.861 5.374 4.411 3.821 2.533

0.161290322580645 7.241 6.701 5.309 4.145 3.81 2.505

0.193548387096774 6.246 5.953 5.062 4.145 3.603 2.472

0.225806451612903 6.213 5.945 4.988 4.102 3.576 2.437

0.258064516129032 6.157 5.904 4.945 4.078 3.56 2.302

0.290322580645161 6.15 5.83 4.922 3.974 3.454 2.258

0.32258064516129 6.136 5.774 4.838 3.855 3.397 2.246

0.354838709677419 5.954 5.643 4.773 3.74 3.267 2.224

0.387096774193548 5.923 5.423 4.679 3.71 3.216 2.074

0.419354838709677 5.787 5.344 4.559 3.696 3.096 2.061

0.451612903225806 5.768 5.339 4.394 3.444 3.083 2.055

0.483870967741936 5.615 5.206 4.097 3.392 2.923 2.052

0.516129032258065 5.446 5.085 4.006 3.368 2.92 2.037

0.548387096774194 5.209 4.974 3.98 3.348 2.909 2.035

0.580645161290323 5.177 4.926 3.977 3.346 2.896 1.972

0.612903225806452 5.094 4.794 3.952 3.209 2.827 1.961

0.645161290322581 5.083 4.716 3.89 3.114 2.774 1.891

0.67741935483871 4.922 4.6 3.879 3.108 2.755 1.863

0.709677419354839 4.761 4.502 3.868 3.036 2.675 1.843

0.741935483870968 4.512 4.328 3.726 2.938 2.641 1.815

0.774193548387097 4.461 4.211 3.661 2.894 2.593 1.791

0.806451612903226 4.383 4.2 3.658 2.883 2.441 1.643

0.838709677419355 4.311 4.007 3.429 2.833 2.374 1.485

0.870967741935484 3.819 3.666 3.094 2.601 2.261 1.464

0.903225806451613 3.764 3.546 3.066 2.49 2.18 1.342

0.935483870967742 3.537 3.238 2.688 2.343 2.151 1.023

0.967741935483871 3.04 2.876 2.248 1.514 1.193 0.3204

0.1 7.8935 7.3488 5.815 4.5964 3.9371 2.5483

Average of yearly averages: 1.99178

Inputs generated by pe4.pl - 8-August-2003

Data used for this run:

Output File: fluazina

Metfile: w24232.dvf

PRZM scenario: ORsnbeansC.txt

EXAMS environment file: pond298.exv
45

45

Chemical Name: Fluazinam

Description Variable Name Value Units Comments

Molecular weight mwt 465.1 g/mol

Henry's Law Const. henry 6.73e-7 atm-m^3/mol

Vapor Pressure vapr 8.25e-6 torr

Solubility sol 0.71 mg/L

Kd Kd mg/L

Koc Koc 1957.5 mg/L

Photolysis half-life kdp 2.5 days Half-life

Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 91.7 days Halfife

Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 0 days Halfife

Aerobic Soil Metabolism asm 396 days Halfife

Hydrolysis: pH 7 42 days Half-life

Method: CAM 2 integer See PRZM manual

Incorporation Depth: DEPI 0.0 cm

Application Rate: TAPP 0.493 kg/ha

Application Efficiency: APPEFF 0.99 fraction

Spray Drift DRFT 0.01 fraction of application rate applied to pond

Application Date Date 31-07 dd/mm or dd/mmm or dd-mm or dd-mmm

Interval 1 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single app.

Record 17: FILTRA

IPSCND 1

UPTKF 0

Record 18: PLVKRT 0

PLDKRT 0

FEXTRC 0.5

Flag for Index Res. Run IR Pond

Flag for runoff calc. RUNOFF none none, monthly or total(average of 

entire run)

stored as fluazinaben.out

Chemical: Fluazinam

PRZM environment: ORsnbeansC.txt modified Satday, 12 October 2002 at 16:20:58

EXAMS environment: pond298.exv modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at 16:33:30

Metfile: w24232.dvf modified Wedday, 3 July 2002 at 09:06:10

Benthic segment concentrations (ppb)

Year Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly

1961 1.146 1.129 0.9353 0.6713 0.5128 0.1374

1962 2.455 2.454 2.441 2.149 1.905 1.274

1963 2.625 2.625 2.62 2.467 2.363 2.078

1964 3.016 3.016 3 2.906 2.817 2.016

1965 3.569 3.568 3.549 3.448 3.357 2.36

1966 2.984 2.983 2.97 2.879 2.819 2.058

1967 2.631 2.631 2.622 2.557 2.521 1.894

1968 2.992 2.989 2.942 2.863 2.794 2.387

1969 3.69 3.677 3.511 3.354 3.176 2.453

1970 4.178 4.177 4.162 4.086 3.986 2.887

1971 3.529 3.528 3.513 3.431 3.365 2.638

1972 2.86 2.86 2.845 2.773 2.729 1.984

1973 3.453 3.439 3.248 2.604 2.53 1.99

1974 3.792 3.791 3.775 3.688 3.611 2.628

1975 3.259 3.259 3.242 3.194 3.111 2.223

1976 2.384 2.384 2.373 2.319 2.296 1.597

1977 2.087 2.072 1.837 1.311 1.117 0.8058

1978 2.333 2.332 2.329 2.289 2.223 1.596
46

46

1979 2.587 2.585 2.535 2.351 2.103 1.524

1980 2.896 2.852 2.772 2.711 2.648 1.926

1981 4.301 4.295 4.175 3.668 3.344 2.589

1982 4.343 4.342 4.325 4.26 4.162 2.848

1983 3.043 3.043 3.035 2.986 2.956 2.322

1984 3.191 3.191 3.176 2.799 2.362 1.954

1985 3.177 3.174 3.127 2.968 2.85 2.049

1986 2.328 2.322 2.306 2.241 2.186 1.767

1987 3.307 3.295 3.052 2.611 2.555 1.932

1988 3.738 3.737 3.719 3.601 3.489 2.458

1989 2.769 2.769 2.759 2.696 2.648 1.976

1990 2.98 2.979 2.963 2.888 2.813 2.062

Sorted results

Prob. Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly

0.032258064516129 4.343 4.342 4.325 4.26 4.162 2.887

0.0645161290322581 4.301 4.295 4.175 4.086 3.986 2.848

0.0967741935483871 4.178 4.177 4.162 3.688 3.611 2.638

0.129032258064516 3.792 3.791 3.775 3.668 3.489 2.628

0.161290322580645 3.738 3.737 3.719 3.601 3.365 2.589

0.193548387096774 3.69 3.677 3.549 3.448 3.357 2.458

0.225806451612903 3.569 3.568 3.513 3.431 3.344 2.453

0.258064516129032 3.529 3.528 3.511 3.354 3.176 2.387

0.290322580645161 3.453 3.439 3.248 3.194 3.111 2.36

0.32258064516129 3.307 3.295 3.242 2.986 2.956 2.322

0.354838709677419 3.259 3.259 3.176 2.968 2.85 2.223

0.387096774193548 3.191 3.191 3.127 2.906 2.819 2.078

0.419354838709677 3.177 3.174 3.052 2.888 2.817 2.062

0.451612903225806 3.043 3.043 3.035 2.879 2.813 2.058

0.483870967741936 3.016 3.016 3 2.863 2.794 2.049

0.516129032258065 2.992 2.989 2.97 2.799 2.729 2.016

0.548387096774194 2.984 2.983 2.963 2.773 2.648 1.99

0.580645161290323 2.98 2.979 2.942 2.711 2.648 1.984

0.612903225806452 2.896 2.86 2.845 2.696 2.555 1.976

0.645161290322581 2.86 2.852 2.772 2.611 2.53 1.954

0.67741935483871 2.769 2.769 2.759 2.604 2.521 1.932

0.709677419354839 2.631 2.631 2.622 2.557 2.363 1.926

0.741935483870968 2.625 2.625 2.62 2.467 2.362 1.894

0.774193548387097 2.587 2.585 2.535 2.351 2.296 1.767

0.806451612903226 2.455 2.454 2.441 2.319 2.223 1.597

0.838709677419355 2.384 2.384 2.373 2.289 2.186 1.596

0.870967741935484 2.333 2.332 2.329 2.241 2.103 1.524

0.903225806451613 2.328 2.322 2.306 2.149 1.905 1.274

0.935483870967742 2.087 2.072 1.837 1.311 1.117 0.8058

0.967741935483871 1.146 1.129 0.9353 0.6713 0.5128 0.1374

0.1 4.1394 4.1384 4.1233 3.686 3.5988 2.637

Average of yearly averages: 2.01377333333333

Inputs generated by pe4.pl - 8-August-2003

Data used for this run:

Output File: fluazina

Metfile: w24232.dvf

PRZM scenario: ORsnbeansC.txt

EXAMS environment file: pond298.exv
47

47

Chemical Name: Fluazinam

Description Variable Name Value Units Comments

Molecular weight mwt 465.1 g/mol

Henry's Law Const. henry 6.73e-7 atm-m^3/mol

Vapor Pressure vapr 8.25e-6 torr

Solubility sol 0.71 mg/L

Kd Kd mg/L

Koc Koc 1957.5 mg/L

Photolysis half-life kdp 2.5 days Half-life

Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 91.7 days Halfife

Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 0 days Halfife

Aerobic Soil Metabolism asm 396 days Halfife

Hydrolysis: pH 7 42 days Half-life

Method: CAM 2 integer See PRZM manual

Incorporation Depth: DEPI 0.0 cm

Application Rate: TAPP 0.493 kg/ha

Application Efficiency: APPEFF 0.99 fraction

Spray Drift DRFT 0.01 fraction of application rate applied to pond

Application Date Date 31-07 dd/mm or dd/mmm or dd-mm or dd-mmm

Interval 1 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single app.

Record 17: FILTRA

IPSCND 1

UPTKF 0

Record 18: PLVKRT 0

PLDKRT 0

FEXTRC 0.5

Flag for Index Res. Run IR Pond

Flag for runoff calc. RUNOFF none none, monthly or total(average of 

entire run)
48

48

Appendix D. Environmental Fate and Effects Data

161-1 Hydrolysis

[

14C]-Fluazinam (phenyl and pyridyl-labeled), at 0.005 ppm, were incubated in sterile buffered pH 

5, 7, and 9 solutions for up to 28 days in the dark at 22°C. Fluazinam was essentially stable at pH 

5, and hydrolyzed with estimated half-lives of 42 days and 6 days for the pH 7 and pH 9 solutions, 

respectively (MRID# 42208412, acceptable).

The only major transformation product was CAPA. In the pH 7 solution, CAPA reached a 

maximum at the end of the study (28 days), with 34% of the applied. In the pH 9 buffer solution 

CAPA reached a maximum on day 20 posttreatment at 84-85% of the applied, and remained at 

about the same levels thereafter.

161-2 Photolysis in Water

This study (MRID#’s 43521009, 44807312, supplemental) is scientifically valid and provides 

useful information on the photolysis of fluazinam in a pH 5 aqueous buffer solution. The 

following problems were observed in the study:

 Even though low recoveries were obtained after three days posttreatment, they happened 

after the calculated half-life. EFED believes that the calculated half-life is generally

accurate.

 The registrant must identify all radioactivity exceeding 10% of the applied.

 The registrant must confirm the sterility of the system.

[

14C]-Fluazinam (uniformly phenyl and pyridyl labeled labeled), at 0.049 ppm, degraded with a 

half-life of 2.5 days (used 0-14 days) data in sterilized pH 5 aqueous buffer solutions irradiated 

with a xenon arc lamp (12 hours light/dark cycles) and kept at 25°C for up to 30 days.

Fluazinam was initially 96.6-99.0% of the applied radioactivity, 63.8-65.0% by day 1, 36.0-40.0% 

by 3 days, and ≤1.9% from 14-30 days.

Only one major degradate was detected, G-504 was initially 0.3% of the applied radioactivity, it 

increased to a maximum of 14.0-17.1% by 7-10 days, and it was 6.3-6.4% at 30 days (last test 

interval). One minor transformation product was observed, AMPA was a maximum of 4.1% of the 

applied. One region of unidentified radioactivity increased at up to 25.7% by 7 days. In addition, 

unidentified polar radioactivity increased to a maximum of 37.0-38.2% of the applied by 23-30 

days. 14CO2 increased to up to 16.0-17.7% of the applied at 28-30 days posttreatment.

In contrast, in the dark control, the degradation of the parent fluazinam was veryslow, with 
49

49

78.0-89.8% of the applied undegraded after 14-30 days posttreatment.

161-3 Photodegradation on Soil

This study (MRID# 44807313, supplemental) is scientifically sound and provides useful 

information about the phototransformation of fluazinam on a loamy sand soil. However, this study

is deficient and does not fulfill the data requirement for the following reasons:

The registrant reported the levels of parent and degradates as percentages of the recovered (or the 

extractable) radioactivity rather than percentages of the applied. Examination of the extractable 

radioactivity shows a decrease over time to around 66-70% after 30 days. Results reported (as 

percent of the extractable) are thus roughly 30% larger than actual percentages of the applied. The 

registrant should report the level of parent and degradates, using the acceptable units and the 

half-life of the parent compound.

The total light intensity was not reported. The registrant should report total light intensity over the 

course of the study as required by EFED guidelines.

[

14C]-Fluazinam (uniformly phenyl and pyridyl ring labeled), at 3.6 ppm, degraded in a loamy sand 

soil at 25°C and irradiated with xenon arc lamp at 12 hour light/dark cycles. Dark control samples 

were also kept. Based on supplemental calculations provided by the registrant, using the recovered 

radioactivity, rather than the percent of the applied, show that the half-life for the irradiated sample 

is approximately 22 days, compared to 69 days for the dark control. The transformation products 

HYPA and AMPA were detected both, in the irradiated sample and the dark controls, but their 

percentages were larger in the irradiated samples.

162-1 Aerobic Soil Metabolism

[

14C]-Fluazinam (phenyl and pyridyl labeled), at 1Kg/ha (5.56 ppm or about 2.7 times the 

maximum application rate), degraded at moderate rates with observed DT50 ~ 30 days (MRID# 

42208413).

Three minor transformation products were detected. HYPA, at a concentration of 8.1-8.2% of the 

applied for the phenyl label (days 14 and 90), and 9.3% of the applied for the pyridyl label (day

180). MAPA and DAPA were only observed at ≤2% of the applied in the study. 

14CO2 comprised 

up to 6.3% of the applied after 361 days posttreatment. A major fraction, 41-42% of the applied, 

at day 361, was very polar material that remained at the origin of the TLC plates. This was not 

further characterized.

162-3 Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism

[

14C]-Fluazinam (pyridyl and phenyl labeled), degraded very quickly in a lake sediment that was 

incubated under anaerobic conditions (flooding plus nitrogen atmosphere), in the dark at 22°C for 
50

50

up to 358 days. The apparent half-life (DT50) was less than one minute, but the calculated half-life 

(t1⁄2), taking into consideration all existing data points was 0.265 days (MRID# 43521010).

For the phenyl labeled material, fluazinam decreased from 96.6% (initial) to 27.6% of the applied 

at 2 minutes. For the pyridyl label, fluazinam decreased from 94.3 to 7.7% at 15 minutes. In both 

cases [14C]-fluazinam was ≤1% by day 6 posttreatment. The following transformation products 

were observed:

 DAPA reached a maximum of 32.7% of the applied by day 30 and decreased to 17.8% of 

the applied by day 183.

 SDS-67200 reached a maximum of 39.6% by day 14 (pyridyl label) and decreased to 

32.4% of the applied by day 183.

 AMPA reached a maximum of 24.2% of the applied at day 0.2 and was not detected by day

183.

 Bound residues increased slowly to 21.7% and 22.2% of the applied for the pyridyl and 

phenyl labels, respectively.

 Total volatiles trapped were ≤1.0% of the applied.

162-4 Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism

This study (MRID# 44807314, acceptable) is scientifically sound and provides useful information 

about the aerobic aquatic metabolism of fluazinam in a system consisting of water from Grand 

River (Lake County, Ohio) and a loamy sand sediment from the same river. The study was found 

to have the following problems:

 The study was not replicated for neither of the radiolabel materials. At a minimum, 

duplicate samples are considered necessary in this type of determination. However, the 

general pattern of decline of fluazinam appeared to be very similar for both radiolabel 

materials. It appears that a new study would not provide substantial new information; 

therefore, EFED will consider this problem resolved at this time.

 The test material was not applied at the time the sediment was flooded. Generally, the test 

material should be added to the water/sediment system when the sediment is flooded. In 

this study, the fluazinam was added after three days of preincubation. Since it was noted 

that through the study the redox potentials were positive and the dissolved oxygen 

remained relatively high (in particular through the first 12 hours), EFED believes that the 

results from this study may be considered acceptable. Therefore, no new studies are 

required at this time.

[

14C]-Fluazinam (pyridyl and phenyl labeled), at 0.02 ppm, degraded quickly in flooded Grand 

River loamy sand sediments incubated under aerobic conditions at 25°C in the dark for up to 30 

days. Time zero data was not reported, but it appeared that dissipation was biphasic and it was 
51

51

rapid through the first 12 hours. A non-linear calculated DT50 reported by the registrant was 

4.0-7.4 hours (phenyl and pyridyl labels, respectively).

Various degradates were detected in the study:

 DCPA was a maximum of 9.8% of the applied at 24 hours for the pyridyl label and 

decreased to 4.0-4.5% by 240-720 hours. The same degradate was a maximum of 11.3% 

at 24 hours for the phenyl labeled material and decreased to 2.6% at 720 hours.

 CAPA was a maximum of 12.6% of the applied at 72 hours (pyridyl label), and 1.6-5.1% 

from 240-720 hours. For the phenyl label, CAPA was a maximum of 9.7% at 30 hours, and 

was 3.5-7.6% at 72-720 hours.

 DAPA was a maximum of 18.4% of the applied at 240 hours for the pyridyl label, and 

remained much the same, at 16.4% at 720 hours. For the phenyl label study, DAPA 

increased to a maximum of 19.0% by 240 hours, and decreased to 9.0% at 720 hours.

 Various minor degradates were also observed (≤7.0%). They included HYPA, G869 and 

AMPA.

163-1 Mobility Batch Equilibrium – Adsoption/Desorption for the Parent Fluazinam

Based on batch equilibrium studies, [14C]-fluazinam (uniformly benzyl labeled), in soil: solution 

slurries, at target concentrations of 0.05-1.0 mg/L, equilibrated for two hours, demonstrated low 

mobility under the testing conditions. Four soils were tested: sand, loamy sand, silt loam, and clay

loam. The four soils were from Switzerland and included a variety of physicochemical 

characteristics. The following table summarizes the results:

Soil Type %OC KF 1/n KOC KF (des.) 1/n KOC (des.)

Sand

Speyer 2.1

0.48 11.12 0.6704 2316.0 33.64 0.867 7008.4

LS

Speyer 2.2

2.55 43.48 0.6813 1705.0 506.5 1.109 19862.8

SiLm

Itingen II

1.42 27.19 0.6504 1915.0 130.5 0.948 9191.6

ClLm

Diegten

2.00 37.88 0.6492 1894.2 368.7 1.087 18433.0

In a later submission, the registrant provided a comparison of the characteristics of the four soils 

used in the Mobility/Batch Equilibrium study. Based on a comparison of texture, pH, cation 

exchange capacity, and organic carbon content, all four soils matched with a fair number of 

samples from Agvise soil characterization laboratory’s database (of 3697 samples). Based on 

similar parameters, it was also found that the soils matched with up to 23 locations from the USDA, 

Soil Conservation Service soil surveys (MRID#’s 42248628 and 42974913).
52

52

163-1 Mobility Leaching for Aged Fluazinam

[

14C]-Fluazinam (phenyl and pyridyl labels), at a nominal application rate of 1 Kg/ha, was 

incubated aerobically in a sandy loam and a loamy sand soil for 30 days. Analysis of the soils 

indicated that the major fraction is parent fluazinam, with up to 26.4% of unextracted radioactivity

and compound XII 

[5-amino-N-(3-chloro-5-trifluoromethyl-2-pyridyl)-4,6-dinitro-α,α,α-trifluoro-o-toluol]. The 

aged soil was applied to a leaching column. A total of 66 cm of “rainfall” were applied over a 

period of 9 weeks. Less than 1% of the applied radiocarbon was found in the leachates and >>80% 

remained at the top of the soil columns (MRID# 42208415).

163-1 Mobility Batch Equilibrium – Adsoption/Desorption for the Degradate CAPA

This study is generally scientifically sound and provides useful information about the mobility of 

the degradate CAPA (uniformly phenyl labeled) via adsorption/desorption (batch equilibrium) 

experiments conducted on four soils at various concentrations. The study, however, is deficient for 

the following reason: The soils were sterilized by the use of a HgCl2 (0.01% solution) prior to the 

study and no reference chemicals of known mobility were tested simultaneously with the degradate 

CAPA to assess the possibility of a change in properties of the soil and subsequently of mobility

of the chemicals. Traditionally, EFED has discouraged the use of sterilization of test soils in 

mobility studies. Sterilization can cause substantial alterations of the physico-chemical properties 

of the soil (this is particularly true for autoclaving). On the other hand, EFED acknowledges that 

in this study the test material appeared to have low mobility. Given the fact that the 1/N values 

were close to 1 (one), both for adsorption and desorption, it appears reasonable to believe that a 

new study would not alter substantially the conclusions drawn from this experiment. Therefore, 

EFED will not require any additional study at this time.

[

14C]-CAPA (uniformly phenyl ring labeled), at four concentrations ranging from 0.2 to 2.0 μg/L, 

was equilibrated in four soil:solution slurries for 24 hours at 25°C, KOC’s obtained are summarized 

as followed:

Soil Type KF KFOC 1/N KF (des.) KFOC (des.) 1/N

SiLm 28 1289 0.92 46 2076 0.93

LmS 11 1317 0.82 30 3539 0.86

SLm 4.9 1876 0.83 13 4959 0.86

SiClLm 67 3784 0.92 83 4663 0.94

164-1 Terrestrial Field Dissipation

NOTES THAT APPLY TO ALL THE TERRESTRIAL FIELD DISSIPATION STUDIES:

These studies provide only supplemental information about the dissipation of parent fluazinam and 
53

53

various of its transformation products. All four studies presented similar problems as described 

below. All four terrestrial field dissipation studies are questionable and do not fulfill §N 

Guidelines for the following reasons:

 Soil storage stability data (MRID# 44807316) indicated poor recoveries of the degradates 

CAPA and MAPA in as little as 29 days of storage of spiked frozen soils from Ephrata, 

Washington. It is noted that generally those metabolites were not detected (or were 

detected at very small concentrations) in all field studies. The problem with the storage 

stability is crucial because the results of these terrestrial field dissipation studies are 

entirely confounded and they cannot be interpreted in light of the laboratory studies. The 

confusion would result because the aerobic soil metabolism shows persistence of the parent 

and no major degradates and all other laboratory studies predict persistence of fluazinam 

total residues. With a poor storage stability study we cannot determine if actually the 

transformation products were ever formed or if they persisted. In addition, there was no 

storage stability data from the other three sites. Since some of the analytes appear to be 

unstable in the soil from Washington, the storage stability information from the other sites 

becomes even more important.

 The portion of the storage stability related to parent fluazinam indicated that the chemical 

was stable frozen for up to 729 days. It appears that the fluazinam concentration from the 

field may be used, and the half-lives of fluazinam from the field studies can be used, at least 

qualitatively in this assessment. At this time, EFED is requiring the registrant to submit 

only one new terrestrial field dissipation study, using the most typical use site, with the 

most typical crop.

 In addition, the studies are deficient because the pesticide trifluralin, pendimethalin, and/or 

ethalfluralin were applied to the field within a short period of time before the first 

application of the test material. These chemicals are structurally related to fluazinam. 

According to the Pesticide Reregistration Rejection Rate Analysis, Environmental Fate 

(EPA, OPP 738-R-93-010, September 1993, pp. 168), “The dissipation of the pesticide 

under field conditions is usually sufficiently complex that the presence of additional 

chemicals with similar physicochemical characteristics raises the question of interference, 

either with the observed rate/dissipation pattern, or with the subsequent chemical analysis. 

If the registrant applies multiple products, they must provide evidence for noninterference 

between components.” The registrant must prove that there is no interference between the 

related compounds applied to the field trials (trifluralin, pendimethalin, and ethalfluralin) 

with fluazinam and its transformation products.

 As expected from the laboratory studies, the parent fluazinam dissipated moderately

rapidly from the four field sites, with half-lives ranging from 9 to 49 days; however, the 

degradation products did not show the pattern expected from the laboratory. In the field, 

the degradates were mainly found sporadically and at relatively low concentrations (≤0.05 

ppm), while the laboratory predicted relative persistence for all four degradates.
54

54

Terrestrial Field Dissipation of Fluazinam on Dry Beans in Ephrata, Washington

This study (MRID# 44807320) provides limited supplemental information on the terrestrial field 

dissipation of fluazinam. Portions of the study have been deemed invalid for the following 

reasons:

 Soil storage stability data was not available for the soil from the test site at Kempton, ND. 

The available storage stability data is inadequate. The majority of the samples were stored 

over 235 days, and the maximum storage period was 810 days.

 The pesticide Sonalan 3EC (ethalfluralin), which is chemically related to fluazinam, was 

applied to the field approximately two weeks prior to study initiation.

Fluazinam (500F SC), broadcast applied four times at ~2 week interval (total application rate 1.8 

lb a.i./A), appeared to dissipate with a calculated DT50 (using non-linear regression) of about 9 

days following the last of four applications on a loamy sand soil planted with pinto beans in 

Ephrata, Washington.

The parent compound was detected in the 0- to 6-inch soil depth from the time immediately

following the first application through day 479 posttreatment. Its degradation appeared to be 

biphasic, with rapid degradation during the first 30 days. Detections of the parent were reported at 

low levels (≤0.02 ppm) through day 60 after the last treatment in the 6- to 12-inch soil layer. There 

were no detections of fluazinam above the limit of quantitation in the 12- to 18-inch soil depth.

The degradate HYPA was detected sporadically at ≤0.02 ppm, in the 0- to 6-inch depth only. The 

degradates MAPA and CAPA were not detected at any sampling interval or depth, except for one 

detection of CAPA in the 6- to 12-inch soil layer, at 0.01 ppm.

Terrestrial Field Dissipation of Fluazinam on Dry Beans in Kempton, North Dakota

This study (MRID# 44807318) provides limited supplemental information on the terrestrial field 

dissipation of fluazinam. Portions of the study have been deemed invalid for the following 

reasons:

 Soil storage stability data was not available for the soil from the test site at Kempton, ND.

The available storage stability data is inadequate. The majority of the samples were stored 

over 235 days, and the maximum storage period was 810 days.

 The pesticide Sonalan 3EC (ethalfluralin), which is chemically related to fluazinam, was 

applied to the field approximately two years prior to study initiation. Furthermore, an 

unidentified herbicide was applied shortly before study initiation.

Fluazinam (500 F), broadcast applied twice at 29-day interval (application rate (0.88-0.90 lb 
55

55

a.i./A/app.), appeared to follow biphasic dissipation, with a half-life of 49 days on a sandy loam 

soil planted with beans in Kempton, North Dakota.

The parent compound was detected in the 0- to 6-inch soil depth from the time immediately

following the first application through day 418 posttreatment. There was only one detection (only

1 of 3 replicates), at 0.01 ppm in the 0- to 12-inch soil depth and there were no detections below 

that level.

The degradate HYPA was detected at ≤0.06 ppm, in the 0- to 6-inch depth only, between the time 

prior to the second application and 118 days posttreatment. The degradates MAPA and CAPA 

were not detected at any sampling interval or depth.

Terrestrial Field Dissipation of Fluazinam on Dry Beans in Porterville, California

This study (MRID# 44807317) provides limited supplemental information on the terrestrial field 

dissipation of fluazinam. Portions of the study have been deemed invalid for the following 

reasons:

 Soil storage stability data was not available for the soil from the test site at Porterville, 

California. The available storage stability data is inadequate. The majority of the samples 

were stored for over 500 days.

 The pesticide Treflan (trifluralin), which is chemically related to fluazinam, was applied to 

the field approximately two months prior to study initiation.

Fluazinam (500F SC), broadcast applied at 28-day interval (total application rate 1.8 lb a.i./A), 

appeared to dissipate, with a half-life of 20 days following the last application on a loamy sand soil 

planted with beans in Porterville, California.

The parent compound was detected in the 0- to 6-inch soil depth from the time immediately

following the first application through day 92 after the last treatment. Sporadic detections above 

the limit of quantitation were reported in the 12- to 18-inch depth.

No detections were reported for MAPA, CAPA, and HYPA at any interval, except for one 

detection of CAPA in the 0- to 6-inch depth at 0.02 ppm at 13 days posttreatment.

Terrestrial Field Dissipation of Fluazinam on Peanuts in Montezuma, Georgia

This study (MRID# 44607319) provides limited supplemental information on the terrestrial field 

dissipation of fluazinam. Portions of the study have been deemed invalid for the following 

reasons:
56

56

 Soil storage stability data was not available for the soil from the test site at Montezuma, 

Georgia. The storage stability data available were inadequate. The majority of the samples 

were stored over 180 days, and the maximum storage period was 645 days.

 The pesticide Prowl 4EC (pendamethalin), which is chemichally related to fluazinam, was 

applied to the field.

Fluazinam (Fluazinam®500F, 41.1% a.i.), broadcast applied four times (28-, 28- and 30-day

intervals) at rates of 0.47-0.49 lb a.i./A/application, dissipated with a registrant-calculated half-life 

of 17.0 days (r2not reported) on a plot of sandy loam soil planted with peanuts in Georgia. 

However, the registrant-calculated half-life was based on data collected prior to and following each 

application (rather than strictly on data obtained following the final application) and the half-life 

was of questionable validity due to variability in the data. Residue data were reported as means of 

three replicates unless otherwise noted; days posttreatment refers to days following the fourth 

application. The parent compound was present in the 0- to 6-inch depth at 0.11-0.15 ppm 

immediately following each of the first three applications. Fluazinam was 0.12 ppm immediately

following the fourth application, was 0.03 ppm (2 of 3 replicates) at 3 days posttreatment, was 

0.05-0.07 ppm from 7 to 21 days, was 0.09 ppm at 30 days, was 0.03 ppm at 60 days and was last 

detected at 0.01 ppm (2 of 3 replicates) at 272 days. The parent compound was detected once in the 

6- to 12-inch depth, at 0.07 ppm (1 of 3 replicates) immediately following the first application, and 

was not detected below that depth. The degradate MAPA was detected once in the 0- to 6-inch 

depth, at 0.01 ppm (2 of 3 replicates) at 7 days posttreatment, and the degradate HYPA was 

detected once in the 0- to 6-inch depth, at 0.01 ppm (1 of 3 replicates) at 14 days; MAPA and 

HYPA were not detected below the 0- to 6-inch depth. The degradate CAPA was not detected at 

any sampling interval or depth.
57

57

Appendix E: Ecological Effects Data:

Overview

The toxicity testing required does not test all species of birds, fish, mammals, invertebrates,and 

plants. Only two surrogate species for birds (Bobwhite quail and mallard ducks) are used to 

represent all bird species (over 900 in the US), three species of freshwater fish (rainbow trout, 

bluegill sunfish and fathead minnow) are used to represent all freshwater fish species (over 900 in 

the US), and one estuarine/marine fish species (sheepshead minnow) is used to represent all 

estuarine/marine fish (over 300 in the US). The surrogate species for terrestrial invertebrates is the 

honey bee, for freshwater invertebrates the surrogate species is usually the waterflea (Daphnia 

magna) and for estuarine/marine invertebrates the surrogate species are mysid shrimp and eastern 

oyster. These five species are used to represent all invertebrates species (over 10,000 in the US). 

For plants, there are ten surrogate species used for all terrestrial plants and five surrogate species 

used for all aquatic plants. There are over 20,000 plant species in the US which includes flowering 

plants, conifers, ferns, mosses, liverworts, hornworts and lichens with over 27,000 species of algae 

worldwide.

The surrogate species testing scheme used in this assessment assumes that a chemical’s 

mechanism of action and toxicity found for avian species is similar to that in all reptiles (over 300 

species in the US). The same assumption applies to amphibians (over 200 species in the US) and 

fish; the tadpole stage of amphibians is assumed to have the same sensitivity as a fish. Therefore, 

the results from toxicity tests on surrogate species are considered applicable to other member 

species within their class and are extrapolated to reptiles and amphibians. The US species numbers 

noted in this section were taken from: http://www.natureserve.org/summary (NatureServe: An 

online encyclopedia of life [web application].2000) and the worldwide species number from 

Ecological Planning and Toxicology, Inc.1996.
58

58

Toxicity to Terrestrial Animals 

Birds, Acute, Subacute and Chronic 

An acute oral toxicity study using the technical grade of the active ingredient (TGAI) is required to 

establish the toxicity of fluazinam to birds. The avian oral LD50 is an acute, single-dose laboratory

study designed to estimate the quantity of toxicant required to cause 50% mortality in a test 

population of birds. The preferred test species is either the mallard duck, a waterfowl, or bobwhite 

quail, an upland gamebird. The TGAI is administered by oral intubation to adult birds, and the 

results are expressed as LD50 milligrams (mg) active ingredient (a.i.) per kilogram (kg). Toxicity

category descriptions are the following (Brooks, 1973):

If the LD50 is less than 10 mg a.i./kg, then the test substance is very highly toxic.

If the LD50 is 10-to-50 mg a.i./kg, then the test substance is highly toxic.

If the LD50 is 51-to-500 mg a.i./kg, then the test substance is moderately toxic.

If the LD50 is 501-to-2,000 mg a.i./kg, then the test substance is slightly toxic.

If the LD50 is greater than 2,000 mg a.i./kg, then the test substance is practically nontoxic.

The results of the studies submitted for fluazinam are in following table below. Since the LD50 falls 

in the range of approximately 1,782 mg ai/kg to greater than 4,190 mg ai/kg, fluazinam is 

categorized as slightly to practically nontoxic to avian species on an acute oral basis. The 

guideline 71-1(a) is fulfilled (MRID Nos. 42248623 and 42248622).

Avian (also Reptilian and Terrestrial-Phase Amphibian) Acute Oral Toxicity - Fluazinam 

Technical

Species % ai LD50

(mg ai/kg) 

Toxicity

Category

MRID No.

Author/year

Classification1

Northern bobwhite

(Colinus virginianus) 95.3 1,782 slightly toxic 42248623/Hakin, B. et al./1991 Core

Mallard Duck

(Anas platyrhynchos) 95.3 >4,190 practically nontoxic

42248622/Roberts, N. 

et al./1991 Core

Two dietary studies using the TGAI are required to establish the toxicity of fluazinam to birds. 

These avian dietary LC50 tests, using the mallard duck and bobwhite quail, are acute, eight-day

dietary laboratory studies designed to estimate the quantities of toxicant required to cause 50% 

mortality in the two respective test populations of birds. The TGAI is administered by mixture to 

juvenile birds' diets for five days followed by three days of "clean" diet, and the results are 

expressed as LC50 parts per million (ppm) active ingredient (a.i.) in the diet. Toxicity category

descriptions are the following (Brooks, 1973): 

If the LC50 is less than 50 ppm a.i., then the test substance is very highly toxic.

If the LC50 is 50-to-500 ppm a.i., then the test substance is highly toxic.
59

59

If the LC50 is 501-to-1,000 ppm a.i., then the test substance is moderately toxic.

If the LC50 is 1001-to-5,000 ppm a.i., then the test substance is slightly toxic.

If the LC50 is greater than 5,000 ppm a.i., then the test substance is practically 

nontoxic.

The results of the studies submitted for fluazinam are in the following table below. Since the LC50

is greater than 10,500 ppm, fluazinam is categorized as practically nontoxic to avian species on an 

acute oral basis. The guidelines 71-2(a) and 71-2(b) are fulfilled (MRID Nos. 42248625 and 

42248624). The toxicity value (LD50) appearing in the shaded area of the table will be used to 

calculate the acute avian risk quotients (RQs). 

Avian (also Reptilian and Terrestrial-Phase Amphibian) Subacute Dietary Toxicity -

Fluazinam Technical

Species % ai LC50(ppm) Toxicity 

Category

MRID/Accession (AC) 

No. Author/Year

Study 

Classification

Mallard Duck (Anas 

platyrhynchos)

95.3 >10,600 practically 

nontoxic

42248625/Roberts, N. et 

al./1991

Core

Northern Bobwhite 

Quail (Colinus 

virginianus)

95.3 >10,500 practically 

nontoxic

42248624/Roberts, N. et 

al./1991

Core

Avian reproduction studies using the Bobwhite quail and mallard duck are laboratory tests 

designed to estimate the quantity of toxicant required to adversely affect the reproductive 

capabilities of a test population of birds. The TGAI is administered by mixture to breeding birds' 

diets throughout their breeding cycle. Test birds are approaching their first breeding season and, 

generally, are 18-to-23 weeks old. The onset of the exposure period is at least 10 weeks prior to 

egg laying. Exposure period during egg laying is generally 10 weeks with a withdrawal period of 

three additional weeks if reduced egg laying is noted. Results are expressed as No Observed 

Adverse Effect Concentration (NOAEC) and various observable effect levels, such as the Lowest 

Observable Adverse Effect Concentration (LOAEC), quantified in units of parts per million of 

active ingredient (ppm a.i.) in the diet. 

Avian reproduction studies using the TGAI are required for fluazinam because birds may be 

subject to repeated or continuous exposure to the pesticide, especially preceding or during the 

breeding season and the pesticide is stable in the environment to the extent that potentially toxic 

amounts may persist in animal feed. The preferred test species are mallard duck and bobwhite 

quail. Results of these tests are tabulated below. The toxicity value (NOAEC) appearing in the 

shaded area of the table will be used to calculate the chronic avian risk quotients (Rqs). Avian 

reproduction studies using bobwhite quail and mallard duck (Guideline 71-4 a & b) resulted in 

LOAECs from 350 to 500 ppm based on reductions 14-day old survivors weight when compared 

to the control (Table 3). The NOAEC ranges from 200 to 350 ppm. Guidelines 71-4(a) and (b) for 
60

60

the TGAI of fluazinam are fulfilled (MRID Nos. 44807323 and 44831907). 

Avian (Reptilian & Terrestrial-Phase Amphibian) Reproduction Chronic Toxicity -

Fluazinam Technical

Species/ Study 

Duration % ai NOAEC/LOAEC (ppm ai) LOAEC Endpoints MRID No.Author/year Classification

Northern bobwhite

(Colinus virginianus)

/22 weeks

97.0 200/350 Reduction in 14-day old 

survivor weight

44807323/Beaver

s, J. et al./1996

Core

Mallard Duck

(Anas platyrhynchos)

/22 weeks

97.0 350/500 Reduction in 14-day old 

survivor weight

44831907/Beaver

s, J. et al./1996

Core

Mammals, Acute and Chronic 

Wild mammal testing is required on a case-by-case basis, depending on the results of lower tier 

laboratory mammalian studies, intended use pattern and pertinent environmental fate 

characteristics. In most cases, rat or mouse toxicity values obtained from the Agency's Health 

Effects Division (HED) substitute for wild mammal testing. The toxicity values used in this 

assessment were taken from HED’s Tox One-Liner and the final Hazard Identification Assessment 

Review Committee (HIARC) report on fluazinam dated February 13, 2001. These toxicity values 

are reported below. The toxicity values (LD50 and NOAEL) appearing in the shaded areas of the 

tables will be used to calculate the acute and chronic mammalian risk quotients (RQ's) in 

subsequent sections. Toxicity category descriptions are the following (Brooks, 1973):

If the LD50 is less than 10 mg a.i./kg, then the test substance is very highly toxic.

If the LD50 is 10-to-50 mg a.i./kg, then the test substance is highly toxic.

If the LD50 is 51-to-500 mg a.i./kg, then the test substance is moderately toxic.

If the LD50 is 501-to-2,000 mg a.i./kg, then the test substance is slightly toxic.

If the LD50 is greater than 2,000 mg a.i./kg, then the test substance is practically nontoxic.

The results indicate that fluazinam is practically nontoxic to mammals on an acute oral basis.

Table 4: Mammalian Acute Oral Toxicity - Fluazinam

Species % ai LD50 (mg ai/kg) Toxicity

Category)

Affected

Endpoints

MRID or 

Accession (AC) 

No.

Technical

laboratory rat 

(Rattus 

norvegicus)

95.3 4,300 (male & female) practically 

nontoxic

mortality 42248603

Mammalian Acute Dermal and Inhalation Toxicity Testing 

In addition to acute oral routes of exposure, terrestrial vertebrates entering treatment area may be 
61

61

acutely exposed to fluazinam through other routes of exposure. Toxicity category descriptions 

associated with dermal routes of exposure include the following (U.S. EPA, July, 1997):

If the LD50 is less than or equal to 200 mg/kg, then the test substance is in Toxicity Category I.

If the LD50 is greater than 200 through 2,000 mg/kg, then the test substance is in Toxicity Category 

II.

If the LD50 is greater than 2,000 through 20,000 mg/kg, then the test substance is in Toxicity 

Category III

If the LD50 is greater than 20,000 mg/kg, then the test substance is in Toxicity Category IV.

The results indicate that fluazinam is a Category III toxicant to mammals on an acute dermal basis. 

 

Mammalian Acute Dermal Toxicity - Fluazinam Technical

Surrogate Species % ai LD50 (mg ai/kg) Toxicity

Category

Affected

Endpoints

MRID or 

Accession (AC) 

No.

laboratory rat 

(Rattus norvegicus)

95.3 >2,000 Category III mortality 42248605

The acute inhalation toxicity results for fluazinam are indicated below. Toxicity category

descriptions associated with inhalation routes of exposure the following (U.S. EPA, July, 1997):

If the LC50 is less than or equal to 0.2 mg/liter, then the test substance is in Toxicity Category I.

If the LC50 is greater than 0.2 mg/liter through 2 mg/liter, then the test substance is in Toxicity 

Category II.

If the LC50 is greater than 2 mg/liter through 20 mg/liter, then the test substance is in Toxicity 

Category III

If the LC50 is greater than 20 mg/liter, then the test substance is in Toxicity Category IV.

The results indicate that fluazinam is a Category II toxicant to mammals based on acute inhalation 

exposure. 

Mammalian Acute Inhalation Toxicity - Fluazinam Technical

Surrogate

Species/

Formulation

% A.I. LC50

(mg/liter)

Toxicity

Category

Affected

Endpoints

MRID or Accession 

(AC) No.

laboratory rat 

(Rattus norvegicus)

95.3 0.463 (male)

0.476 (female)

Category II mortality 42270601
62

62

Mammalian Subchronic Toxicity Testing 

The submitted mammalian subchronic feeding study indicate that extended exposure to fluazinam 

residues via the diet at levels greater than 50 ppm could result in the toxicological concerns cited 

below.

Mammalian Subchronic Toxicity - Fluazinam

Surrogate 

Species/

type-duratio

n

% ai

Test

Type

NOAEL

/LOAEL

(mg/kg/

LOAEL Endpoints MRID or 

Accession (AC) 

No.

Laboratory 

rat 

(Rattus 

norvegicus)/

feeding-13 

weeks

98.5 Feeding 4.1/41

(50/500 

ppm)

Periacinar hepatocytic hypertrophy 

(liver & gall bladder enlargement) 

and sinusoidal (venous cavities) 

chronic inflamation in males, 

increase in absolute & relative liver 

weights in males, increase in 

absolute and relative lung weights in 

females, and increase in absolute & 

relative uterus weights.

42248610

Mammalian Reproductive and Developmental Toxicity Testing 

The treatment related developmental and reproductive effects caused by fluazinam are indicated 

below. A developmental fluazinam study on laboratory rats indicated the maternal LOAEL was 

5,000 ppm (NOAEL ≈ 1,000 ppm) due to decreased food consumption and body weight gain. The 

developmental LOAEL in this study, due to decreased body weights, placental weights, and an 

increased incidence of facial palate clefts, was determined to be 2,500 ppm (NOAEL ≈ 500 ppm). 

Another fluazinam developmental test, with laboratory rabbits, indicated the maternal LOAEL 

was 231 ppm (NOAEL = 132 ppm) due to an increased incidence of liver histopathology and a 

slight depression of food consumption. The developmental LOAEL, in this study on rabbits, was 

396 ppm due to the increased incidence of total liter loss and the possible, slightly, increased 

incidence of fetal abnormalities which included placental abnormalities and some skeletal 

abnormalities (kinked tail tip, fused or incompletely ossified sternebrae, and abnormalities of head 

bones). The developmental NOAEL on the rabbit study was 231 ppm.

A 2-generational reproductive study for fluazinam on laboratory rats indicated the parental 

LOAEL was 100 ppm (NOAEL = 20 ppm) based on liver pathology (increased incidences of 

periacinar hepatocystic fatty changes) in F1 males, the reproductive LOAEL was 500 ppm 

(NOAEL = 100 ppm) based on a decreased number of implantation sites and decreased litter sizes 

to day 4 postpartum (after pup birth) for F2 litters, and the developmental LOAEL was also 500 

ppm (NOAEL = 100 ppm) based on decreased body weight gain during lactation for both F1 and 

F2 pups. The reproductive NOAEL of 100 ppm in this study (MRID No. 42248619) will be used 

to determine chronic mammalian risk quotients (RQ's) in subsequent sections 
63

63

Mammalian Feeding, Developmental and Reproductive Chronic Toxicity - Fluazinam 

Technical 

Species/

Study 

Duration

% 

ai Test

Type 

NOAEL/LOAEL

Toxicity

Value 

(mg/kg/day)1

Affected

Endpoints

MRID or 

Accession 

(AC) No.

laboratory 

rabbit 

(Sylvivlagus 

sp.)/not 

reported

98.5 Developmental 4/7

(132/231 ppm)

(maternal)

7/12

(231/396 ppm)

(developmental)

mat. - increased incidence of liver 

histopathological lesions [cellular 

hypertrophy, single cell necrosis, 

binucleate hepatocytes (liver 

cells), increased brown pigment 

deposition and apoptosis (cell 

death)] & slight depression of 

food consumption.

dev. - increased incidence of total 

liter loss & possible, slightly, 

increased incidence of fetal 

abnormalities (placental 

abnormalities, some skeletal 

abnormalities including kinked 

tail tip, fused or incompletely 

ossified sternebrae, abnormalities 

of head bones).2

42248616

laboratory 

rat 

(Rattus 

norvegicus)

/not 

reported

98.5 Developmental 50/250

(1,000/5,000 ppm)

(maternal)

50/250

(500/2,500 ppm)

(developmental)

mat. - decreased food 

consumptionn & body wt. gain

dev. - decreased body wt., 

placental wt., and increased 

incidence of facial palate clefts

42248613

laboratory 

rat 

(Rattus 

norvegicus)

/2-generatio

n

95.3 Reproductive 1.9/9.7

(20/100 ppm)3

(parental)

10.6/53.6

(100/500 ppm)3

(reproductive)

8.4/42.1

(100/500 ppm)3

(devlopmental)

par. - based on liver pathology 

(increased incidences of 

periacinar hepatocystic fatty 

changes) in F1 males

rep. - based on a decreased 

number of implantation sites and 

decreased litter sizes to day 4 

postpartum (after pup birth) for 

F2 litters

dev. - based on decreased body 

weight gain during lactation for 

both F1 and F2 pups

42248619

1 ppm conversion based on: 1 mg/kg/day = 20 ppm in adult rats, 10 ppm in younger rats, and 33 ppm in rabbits. 

(Nelson, 1975)

2 The committee (HIARC) considered the developmental toxicity effects observed at the LOAEL in this study 

(increased incidence of total litter resorptions and a possibly increased incidence of fetal skeletal abnormalities, 

including kinked tail tip, fused or incompletely ossified sternebrae, and abnormalities of head bones) to be effects that 

could occur after a single dose of fluazinam. Also, with respect to developmental toxicity effects, the rabbit is more 
64

64

sensitive than the rat.

3 ppm results provided in study

Insect Acute Contact 

A honey bee acute contact study using the TGAI is required for fluazinam because its outdoor use 

will result in honey bee exposure. The acute contact LD50, using the honey bee, Apis mellifera, is 

an acute contact, single-dose laboratory study designed to estimate the quantity of toxicant 

required to cause 50% mortality in a test population of bees. The TGAI is administered by one of 

two methods: whole body exposure to technical pesticide in a nontoxic dust diluent; or, topical 

exposure to technical pesticide via micro-applicator. The median lethal dose (LD50) is expressed 

in micrograms of active ingredient per bee (μg a.i./bee). Results of this test are tabulated below. 

Toxicity category descriptions are the following (Atkins, 1981):

If the LD50 is less than 2 μg a.i./bee, then the test substance is highly toxic.

If the LD50 is 2 to less than 11 μg a.i./bee, then the test substance is moderately 

toxic.

If the LD50 is 11 μg a.i./bee or greater, then the test substance is practically 

nontoxic

The two (2) acute oral toxicity studies are categorized as supplemental because the submission of 

insect acute oral toxicity studies is not a guideline requirement and the core classification is 

reserved for guideline studies that fulfill guideline requirements. The acute contact study on the 

49.7% typical end-use product (TEP) is categorized as supplemental because the guideline (141-1) 

requires the study be performed on a TGAI formulation. Additionally, the highest concentration 

tested for the acute contact study on the TEP was 4 μg/bee and a definitive LD50, greater than 11 

μg/bee considered to be toxic to honey bees, was not established at this level. For the reasons 

indicated above the two (2) acute oral toxicity studies and the acute contact study on the fluazianm 

TEP are being downgraded from the current Core status to Supplemental through the issuance of 

this document. All four (4) bee studies submitted for fluazinam received the same MRID No. 

however only the acute contact study for the TGAI formulation is considered to be a Core study. 

The acute contact LD50 for fluazinam is greater than 200 μg per bee and it is, therefore, classified 

as practically nontoxic to bees. The guideline (141-1) is fulfilled (MRID No. 42208411).
65

65

Insect Acute Contact Toxicity - Fluazinam

Species/Study 

Duration

% ai

LD50

(μg/bee) Toxicity 

Category

MRID/Accession 

(AC) No.

Author/Year

Study 

Classification

Honey bee

(Apis 

mellifera)/48 hour

98.8 > 200 practically 

nontoxic

42208411/Collins, I. 

et al./1992

Core

Honey bee

(Apis 

mellifera)/48 hour

49.7 > 4 (highest 

concentration 

tested)

not applicable 42208411/Collins, I. 

et al./1992

Supplemental

Insect Acute Oral Toxicity - Fluazinam

Honey bee

(Apis 

mellifera)/48 hour

98.8 > 100 practically 

nontoxic

42208411/Collins, I. 

et al./1992

Supplemental

Honey bee

(Apis 

mellifera)/48 hour

49.7 > 100 practically 

nontoxic

42208411/Collins, I. 

et al./1992

Supplemental

Insect Residual Contact 

A honey bee toxicity of residues on foliage study is required on an end-use product for any

pesticide intended for outdoor application when the proposed use pattern indicates that honey bees 

may be exposed to the pesticide and when the formulation contains one or more active ingredients 

having an acute contact honey bee LD50 which falls in the moderately toxic or highly toxic range. 

The purpose of this guideline study is to develop data on the residual toxicity to honey bees. Bee 

mortality determinations are made from bees exposed to treated foliage harvested at various time 

periods after treatment. Fluazinam, as indicated in the acute toxicity test in Table 9, above, is 

practically nontoxic to honey bees. Because of this, a honey bee toxicity of residues on foliage 

(guideline 141-2) is not required for fluazinam.

Earthworm Acute and Chronic 

Two (2) acute/chronic earthworm studies were reviewed for fluazinam. These studies were 

classified as supplemental since earthworm studies are not a guideline requirement under FIFRA. 

These studies were conducted in compliance with the Organization for Economic Cooperation 

and Development (OECD) guidelines for testing of chemicals and were reviewed, by EFED, under 

EPA Ecological Effects Test Guidelines (U.S. EPA Ecological Effects Test Guidelines, April, 

1996). In addition to being nonguideline studies, these studies were also classified as supplemental 

due to numerous deficiencies and/or deviations from US guidelines. Principally, in both studies, 

test material concentrations in the soil were not measured, which resulted in toxicity endpoints 

based solely upon nominal values. The results of these studies are below. A NOAEC was not 

determined on the TEP (MRID No. 44807336) because of significant effects on earthworm body

weights at all treatment levels. The lowest treatment level in the TEP study was 53 ppm. EFED 

does not have a toxicity categorization for earthworms.
66

66

Earthworm Acute and Chronic Toxicity - Fluazinam Technical and TEP

Species/

Study 

Duration

% ai

LC50/

EC50

(nominal/

measured)

(ppm in 

dry soil)

Toxicity 

Category

NOAEC/

LOAEC

(nominal/

measured)

(ppm in dry 

soil)

Endpoints 

Affected

MRID/Accession 

(AC) No.

Author/Year

Study 

Classification

Earthworm 

(Eisenia 

foetida)/28 

days

97.3 > 1,000

(nominal)

not 

applicable

10/100

(nominal)

reduction 

in body 

weights

44807335/Edwards, 

P & J. Coulson/1985

Supplemental

Earthworm 

(Eisenia 

foetida)/14 

days

38.4 > 1,376

(nominal)

not 

applicable

not 

determined

not 

applicable

44807336/Yearsdon, 

H. et al./1991

Supplemental

Toxicity to Aquatic Animals 

Freshwater Fish, Acute 

Two freshwater fish toxicity studies using the TGAI are required to establish the toxicity of 

fluazinam to fish. The preferred test species are rainbow trout (a coldwater fish, Guideline 72-1c) 

and bluegill sunfish (a warmwater fish; Guideline 72-1a). Results of these tests are tabulated 

below. The toxicity category descriptions for freshwater and estuarine/marine fish and aquatic 

invertebrates, are defined below in parts per million (ppm), the standard units of measure (Brooks, 

1973). The toxicity values (LC50) appearing in the shaded area of the tables will be used to 

calculate the acute aquatic risk quotients (RQ's) in subsequent sections. 

If the LC50 is less than 0.1 ppm a.i., then the test substance is very highly toxic.

If the LC50 is 0.1-to-1.0 ppm a.i., then the test substance is highly toxic.

If the LC50 is greater than 1 and up through 10 ppm a.i., then the test substance is

moderately toxic.

If the LC50 is greater than 10 and up through 100 ppm a.i., then the test substance is 

slightly toxic.

If the LC50 is greater than 100 ppm a.i., then the test substance is practically nontoxic.

Since the LC50 falls in the range of 0.036-0.11 ppm, for the TGAI, fluazinam is categorized as 

very highly to highly toxic to freshwater fish on an acute basis. Guidelines 72-1(a) and 72-1(c) for 

the TGAI of fluazinam are fulfilled (MRID Nos. 42974904, 42974905, and 42208409).
67

67

Freshwater Fish 96-hr Acute Toxicity - Fluazinam.

Species/

Flow-through or 

Static

% ai LC50 / (C.I.)

(ppm ai)/

(measured/nomin

al)

Toxicity 

Category

MRID /Accession No./ 

Author/Year

Study 

Classification

Bluegill sunfish 

(Lepomis 

macrochirus)

/flow-through

96.8 0.0527

(0.0471-0.0599)

(measured)

very highly 

toxic

42974905/Gelin, M. and 

J. Laveglia/1993

Core

Rainbow Trout

(Salmo 

gairdneri)/flow-throu

gh

97.3 0.11/

(0.10-0.13)1

(measured)

highly toxic 42208409/Hill, R./1992 Core

Rainbow Trout

(Salmo 

gairdneri)/flow-throu

gh

96.8 0.036/

(0.033-0.056)1

(measured)

very highly 

toxic

42974904/Gelin, M. and 

J. Laveglia/1992

Core

1 Based on total formulation.

Freshwater Fish, Chronic 

A freshwater fish early life-stage test using the TGAI is required for fluazinam because the end-use 

product is expected to be transported to water from the intended use site, and the following 

conditions are met: (1) the pesticide is intended for use such that its presence in water is likely to 

be continuous or recurrent, (2) an aquatic acute LC50 or EC50 is less than 1ppm, and (3) the EEC 

in water is equal to or greater than 0.01 of any acute LC50 or EC50 value. Acceptable freshwater test 

species are rainbow trout, brook trout, coho salmon, Chinook, bluegill, brown trout, lake trout, 

northern pike, fathead minnow, white sucker and channel catfish. The fish early life-stage is a 

laboratory test designed to estimate the quantity of toxicant required to adversely effect the 

reproductive capabilities of a test population of fish. The test should be performed using 

flow-through conditions. The TGAI is administered into water containing the test species, 

providing exposure throughout a critical life-stage, and the results are expressed as a No Observed 

Adverse Effect Concentration (NOAEC) and Lowest Observed Adverse Effect Concentration 

(LOAEC) in parts per billion (ppb) of active ingredient. The No Observed Adverse Effect 

Concentration represents an exposure concentration, at or below which biologically significant 

effects will not occur to species of similar sensitivities. The following table is a summary of a 

freshwater fish early life-stage test (Guideline 72-4a). The fish early life stage test showed effects 

at 10 ppb that included larval survival and growth. Guideline 72-4(a) for freshwater species is 

fulfilled (MRID No. 44807327).
68

68

Freshwater Fish Early Life-Stage Toxicity Under Flow-through Conditions - Fluazinam 

Technical

Species % ai NOAEC/LOAEC 

(ppb)

Endpoints 

Affected

MRID/Accession 

(AC) No.

Author/Year

Study1 

Classification

Fathead minnow

(Pimephales 

promelas)

96.8 5.3/10

(measured)

Larval survival; 

Growth

44807327/

Machado/1993

Core

A freshwater fish early life-cycle test using the TGAI is required for fluazinam because the end-use 

product is expected to be transported to water from the intended use site and any EEC is equal to 

or greater than one-tenth of the NOAEC in the fish early life-stage or invertebrate life-cycle test. 

The preferred test species is fathead minnow. The results from a fathead minnow full life cycle 

study suggest that fluazinam exposure can result in reproductive effects at 1.4 ppb (# spawn per 

female; % hatch). The freshwater fish life-cycle test (Guideline 72-5) has been fulfilled (MRID No. 

44807329). The toxicity value (NOAEC) appearing in the shaded area of the table will be used to 

calculate the chronic aquatic risk quotients (RQ's) in subsequent sections.

Freshwater Fish Early Life-Cycle Toxicity Under Flow-through Conditions - Fluazinam 

Technical

Species % ai NOAEC/ LOAEC

(ppb)

Endpoints Affected MRID #/ 

Author/Date

Study 

Classification

Fathead minnow

(Pimephales 

promelas)

97.4 0.69/1.4

(measured)

Reproductive (# 

spawns/female; % 

hatch)

44807329/ 

Dionne/1995

Core

Freshwater Invertebrates, Acute 

A freshwater aquatic invertebrate toxicity test using the TGAI is required to establish the toxicity

of fluazinam to aquatic invertebrates. The preferred test organism is Daphnia magna, but early

instar amphipods, stoneflies, mayflies, or midges may also be used. Results of this test are 

tabulated below. The toxicity value (EC50) appearing in the shaded area of the table will be used 

to calculate the acute risk quotients (RQ's) in subsequent sections. Since the LC50/EC50 falls in 

the range of 0.18-0.222 ppm, fluazinam is categorized highly toxic to freshwater aquatic 

invertebrates on an acute basis. Guideline 72-2(a) for the TGAI of fluazinam is fulfilled (MRID 

Nos. 42974906 and 42208410).
69

69

Freshwater Invertebrate Acute Toxicity - Fluazinam Technical

Species/Static or 

Flow-through/Duration

% ai LC50/

EC50 (ppm)/(C.I.)/

(nominal/measured)

Toxicity 

Category

MRID/Accession 

(AC) No. 

Author/Year

Study 

Classification

Daphnid

(Daphnia 

magna)/flow-through (48 

hr.)

96.8 0.222/

(0.188-0.300)1

(measured)

 highly toxic 42974906/Shults, S. et 

al./1992

Core

Daphnid

(Daphnia magna)static 

(48 hr.)

98.5 0.18/

(0.14-0.22)1

(measured)

highly toxic 42208410/Farrelly, E. 

et al./1992

Core

1 Based on total formulation.

 

Freshwater Invertebrate, Chronic 

A freshwater aquatic invertebrate life-cycle test using the TGAI is required for fluazinam since the 

end-use product is expected to be transported to water from the intended use site, and the following 

conditions are met: (1) the pesticide is intended for use such that its presence in water is likely to 

be continuous or recurrent, (2) the aquatic acute LC50 or EC50 is less than 1.0 ppm, and (3) the 

EEC in water is equal to or greater than 0.01 of any acute EC50 or LC50 value. The preferred test 

species is Daphnia magna. Results of this test are tabulated below. Fluazinam exposure to 

freshwater invertebrates can potentially result in reproductive and growth effects at 140 ppb. The 

toxicity value (NOAEC) appearing in the shaded area of the table will be used to calculate the 

chronic risk quotients (RQ's) in subsequent sections. The guideline requirement (72-4b) is 

fulfilled (MRID 44807328).

Freshwater Aquatic Invertebrate Life-Cycle Toxicity - Fluazinam Technical 

Species/Static 

Renewal or 

Flow-through

% ai 21-day

NOAEC/LOAEC 

(ppb)

Endpoints 

Affected

MRID/Accession (AC) 

No.Author/Year

Study 

Classification

Daphnid(Daphni

a magna/ 

flow-through

96.8 68/140 Reproductive (# 

young/female) and 

growth )

44807328/

Putt/1993

Core

Estuarine and Marine Fish, Acute 

Acute toxicity testing with estuarine and marine fish using the TGAI is required for fluazinam 

because the end-use product is expected to reach the marine/estuarine environment because of its 

use in coastal counties. The preferred test organisms are the sheepshead minnow. Results of this 

test are tabulated below. Fluazinam exposure to estuarine/marine fish has the potential for very

high acute toxicity (120 ppb). The guideline requirement (72-3a) is fulfilled (MRID 44807325). 

The toxicity value (LC50) appearing in the shaded area of the table will be used to calculate the 

acute risk quotients (RQ's) in subsequent sections.
70

70

Summary of acute 96-hr toxicity tests for Estuarine/Marine Fish with Fluazinam.Technical

Species % ai

LC50

ppm 

Toxicity

Category

MRID No.

Author/year Classification

Sheepshead Minnow/

(Cyprinodon 

variegatus)/

96.8 0.120 Very highly 

toxic

44807325/

Machado/1993

Core

Estuarine and Marine Fish, Chronic 

An estuarine/marine fish early life-stage toxicity test using the TGAI is required for fluazinam 

because the end-use product is expected to be transported to the estuarine/marine environment 

from the intended use site, and the following conditions are met: the pesticide is intended for use 

such that its presence in water is likely to be continuous or recurrent and the EEC in water is equal 

to or greater than 0.01 of any acute LC50 or EC50 value. The preferred test species is sheepshead 

minnow. The guideline (72-4a) is not fulfilled. A core study is required to be submitted for this 

guideline.

Freshwater Fish Early Life-Stage Toxicity Under Flow-through Conditions - Fluazinam 

Technical

Species % ai NOAEC/LOAEC 

(ppb)

Endpoints 

Affected

MRID/Accession 

(AC) No.

Author/Year

Study1 

Classification

Sheepshead 

minnow 

(Cyprinodon 

variegates)

98.4 26/>26 No effects 45822102 Supplemental

Estuarine and Marine Invertebrates, Acute 

Acute toxicity testing with estuarine/marine invertebrates using the TGAI is required for fluazinam 

because the end-use product is expected to reach the marine/estuarine environment because of it 

use in coastal counties. The preferred test species are mysid shrimp and eastern oyster. Results of 

these tests are tabulated below. Fluazinam is very highly toxic to estuarine/marine invertebrates 

(mysid shrimp) on an acute basis (39 ppb). This compound is also acutely toxic to bivalves (4.7 

ppb). The guideline requirements (72-3b & c) are fulfilled (MRID 44807326; 44807324). The 

toxicity value (EC50) appearing in the shaded area of the table will be used to calculate the acute 

risk quotients (RQ's) in subsequent sections. 
71

71

Estuarine/Marine Invertebrate Acute Toxicity - Fluazinam Technical

Species/Static or 

Flow-through % ai.

48-hour

EC50 (ppm) Toxicity 

Category

MRID No./

Author/Year

Study 

Classification

Eastern oyster 

(Crassostrea 

virginica)/flow-through (shell 

deposition)

96.8 0.0047 Very Highly 

Toxic

44807324/

Dionne/1993

Core

Mysid 

(Americamysis bahia) 96.8 0.039 Very Highly 

Toxic

44807326/

Machado/1992

Core

Estuarine and Marine Invertebrate, Chronic 

An estuarine/marine invertebrate life-cycle toxicity test (Guideline 72-4b) using the TGAI is 

required for fluazinam because the end-use product is expected to be transported to the 

estuarine/marine environment from the intended use site, the pesticide is intended for use such that 

its presence in water is likely to be continuous or recurrent, the aquatic acute LC50 or EC50 is less 

than 1.0 ppm, and the EEC in water is equal to or greater than 0.01 of any acute LC50 or EC50 

value. The preferred test species is mysid shrimp. 

Estuarine Aquatic Invertebrate Life-Cycle Toxicity - Fluazinam Technical 

Species/Static 

Renewal or 

Flow-through

% ai 21-day

NOAEC/LOAEC 

(ppb)

Endpoints 

Affected

MRID/Accession (AC) 

No.Author/Year

Study 

Classification

Mysid 98.4 2.0/3.9 Reproductive 

success

45822101 Supplemental

Toxicity to Plants 

Terrestrial Plants 

Terrestrial plant Tier I seedling emergence and vegetative vigor testing of a fluazinam Technical 

End-Use product (TEP) is currently recommended for all pesticides having outdoor uses (Keehner. 

July 1999). For seedling emergence and vegetative vigor testing, the following plant species and 

groups should be tested: (1) six species of at least four dicotyledonous families, one species of 

which is soybean (Glycine max) and the second is a root crop, and (2) four species of at least two 

monocotyledonous families, one of which is corn (Zea mays). Tier I tests measure the response of 

plants, relative to a control, at a test level that is equal to the highest use rate expressed as pounds 

active ingredient per acre (lbs ai/A). Tier II studies are required if the Tier I studies indicate any

of the test species, when exposed to the test material, displayed a ≥25% inhibition or 

over-enhancement of various growth parameters as compared to the control.
72

72

Tier I seedling emergence [guideline 122-1(a)] and vegetative vigor [guideline 122-1(b)] studies 

(MRID Nos. 44807331 and 44807332, respectively) for TGAI fluazinam were received but were 

determined to be invalid principally because these studies relied upon the measurement of the fresh 

weights (as opposed to dry weights) of the above ground portions of the plants tested to determine 

if detrimental effects were being caused by fluazinam. Fresh weight measurements are too 

variable and subject to different cultural practices and environmental factors and thus a scientific 

determination of the effects caused by fluazinam to terrestrial plants could not be made. Two other 

Tier I studies were also submitted (MRIDs 46172801 and 46172802). The seedling emergence 

study (MRID 46172801) used a 41.5% formulation and was deemed as acceptable with no effects 

to plants. The vegetative vigor study (MRID 46172802), also using a 41.5% formulation, was 

deemed invalid due to many study deviations but may be upgradeable if deficiencies are addressed. 

Terrestrial Tier II plant testing is required when it is determined that a pesticide has exhibited an 

adverse effect greater or equal to 25% during Tier I testing or when the pesticide is a known 

phytotoxicant. Tier II tests measure the response of plants, relative to a control, and five or more 

test concentrations to determine toxicity endpoints (NOAEC or EC05 and EC25). A Tier II 

vegetative vigor [guideline 123-1(b)] study (MRID No. 44807333) for TGAI fluazinam was 

reviewed and determined to be invalid principally because the study relied upon fresh weight 

measurements as opposed to dry weight measurements. Guideline 123-1(b) Tier II has not been 

fulfilled for fluazinam and it is recommended that a study be submitted if the registrant determines 

(through Tier I testing) or suspects that fluazinam is a phytotoxicant. It should be noted that single 

active ingredient, Technical End-Use product (TEP) testing instead of the TGAI is recommended 

for all terrestrial plant tests. It is recommended that a TEP be used if/when this guideline study is 

resubmitted for review. Guideline 123-1 Tier I studies have been submitted, though the Vegetative 

Vigor study should be repeated.

Aquatic Plants 

Aquatic plant testing is recommended for all pesticides having outdoor uses (Keehner July 1999). 

The tests are performed on species from a cross-section of the aquatic plant population. The 

preferred test species are duckweed (Lemna gibba), marine diatom (Skeletonema costatum), 

blue-green algae (Anabaena flos-aquae), freshwater green alga (Selenastrum capricornutum), and 

a freshwater diatom. Tier I aquatic plant testing is a maximum dose test designed to quickly

evaluate the toxic effects to the test species in terms of growth and reproduction and to determine 

the need for additional aquatic plant testing. Tier II aquatic plant testing is a multiple dose test of 

the plants species that showed a phytotoxic effect to the pesticide being tested at the Tier I level. 

Tier II testing is designed to determine the detrimental effect levels of the chemical on the aquatic 

plants which showed a greater than 50% detrimental effect in Tier I testing.

For fluazinam, one Tier II study has been submitted for S. capricornutum (MRID No. 44807334). 

Results of Tier II toxicity testing on the technical material are tabulated in the table below. The 

EC50 for S. capricornutum was 180.0 ppb a.i. based on growth inhibition; the NOAEC was 48.0 

ppb. The submitted study was determined to be supplemental because the light intensity used in 
73

73

this study (7,200 lux) exceeded the recommended light intensity (4,300 ± 15% lux). The toxicity

value (EC50) appearing in the shaded area of the table will be used to calculate the acute risk 

quotients (RQ's) in subsequent sections. Guideline 123-2 Tier II Aquatic Plant Growth studies 

with freshwater green algae (Selenastrum capricornutum), marine diatom (Skeletonema costatum) 

and a freshwater diatom (Navicula pelliculosa) were deemed as invalid and should be repeated. 

The duckweed (Lemna gibba) study is upgradeable if data are submitted.

Aquatic Plant Toxicity (Tier II) - Fluazinam Technical

Species/duration % A. I.

EC50/NOAEC

(ppb ai) MRID No.

Author/year Classification

Duckweed 

(Lemna gibba)

98.4 >69.1/17.5 45822103 Invalid (upgradeable)

freshwater green 

algae

(Selenastrum 

capricornutum)

98.4 >170/170 45822104 Invalid (not repairable)

Freshwater 

diatom (Navicula 

pelliculosa)

98.4 0.90/0.76 45822105 Invalid (not repairable)

Bluegreen algae

(Anabaena 

flosaquae)

98.4 9200/72 45822106 Acceptable

Marine diatom 

(Skeletonema 

costatum)

98.4 11/7.5 45822107 Invalid (not repairable)

Freshwater green 

algae

(Selenastrum 

capricornutum)

/96 hrs.

97.0 180/48

(measured)

44807334/Smyth, D. & J. 

Tapp/1987 Supplemental
74

74

Appendix F: Endangered Species

A listing is not attached due to the massive volume of possibly affected species.